ankara hippodrome: the national celebrations of...
TRANSCRIPT
ANKARA HIPPODROME: THE NATIONAL CELEBRATIONS
OF EARLY REPUBLICAN TURKEY, 1923-1938
A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES
OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY
BY
DİLER ÖZDEMİR
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE
SEPTEMBER 2004
Approval of the Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences Prof. Dr. Canan Özgen Director I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Master of Architecture. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Selahattin Önür Head of Department This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Architecture.
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Güven Arif Sargın
Supervisor
Examining Committee Members Assist. Prof. Dr. Elvan Altan Ergut (METU, ARCH)
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Güven Arif Sargın (METU, ARCH)
Prof. Dr. Tansu Şenyapılı (CP, METU)
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ali Cengizkan (METU, ARCH)
Inst. Dr. Haluk Zelef (METU, ARCH
iii
I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all materials and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last Name: DİLER ÖZDEMİR Signature :
iv
ABSTRACT
ANKARA HIPPODROME: THE NATIONAL CELEBRATIONS
OF EARLY REPUBLICAN TURKEY, 1923-1938
Özdemir, Diler
M.Arch., Department of Architecture
Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Güven Arif Sargın
September 2004, 139 Pages
This study analyzes the relationship between national celebrations and the spatial
practices of Ankara Hippodrome in the Early Republican Turkey. National festivals
are regarded as social-performative commemorations and political practices in origin.
The period between 1923 and 1938 is considered as the construction period of the
Republican Regime that gave a form for the recollection of Turkish society. The
scope of our thesis is limited with the construction of social memory, which is
integrated with the ‘nation-construction’ processes. The Hippodrome is then taken as
an important space of these practices of national celebrations, which were legitimized
to convey national meanings and imaginings. The conceptual frame and the case
study of our research are structured by the archival official documents of this period
to explore how the nation- building processes are realized through the interaction
between memory and space.
Keywords: Social Memory, Commemorational Ceremonies, Nation-Construction,
Invention, Tradition
v
ÖZ
ANKARA HİPODROMU:
ERKEN CUMHURİYET DÖNEMİ TÜRKİYE’SİNDE
MİLLİ BAYRAM KUTLAMALARI, 1923-1938
Özdemir, Diler
Yüksek Lisans, Mimarlık Bölümü
Tez Yöneticisi : Doç. Dr. Güven Arif Sargın
Eylül 2004, 139 Sayfa
Bu çalışma, milli bayram kutlamaları ve mekânsal pratikler arasındaki ilişkiyi
Ankara Hipodrom Alanı’nda Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nin erken yılları bağlamında
analiz etmektedir. Milli bayram kutlamaları sosyal eylemler içeren, siyasal
anımsamalar olarak ele alınmıştır. 1923 ve 1938 yılları arasındaki dönem,
Cumhuriyet Rejimi’nin inşa edildiği ve toplumsal anmalara biçim veren bir
dönemdir. Ulusun inşası süreciyle bütünleşmiş toplumsal hafıza tezimizin
çerçevesini belirlemektedir. Hipodrom, ulusal anlamların iletilmesi ve ulusal
imajların somutlaştırılması için meşrulaştırılmış ulusal kutlama pratiklerinin mekânı
olarak ele alınmıştır. Hafıza ve mekân arasındaki etkileşim aracılığıyla ulusun inşa
sürecinin nasıl gerçekleştirildiğini açığa çıkarmak için, resmi arşiv dokümanlarının
analizi yoluyla tezimizin kavramsal yapısı ve alan araştırması oluşturulmuştur.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Sosyal Hafıza, Anma Törenleri, Ulusun İnşası, İcat, Gelenek
vi
To My Mother
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor Assoc. Prof. Dr.
Güven Arif Sargın for his guidance, advice, criticism and patience throughout the
research. I am also grateful to my friends who encouraged me to continue my studies
during those difficult days.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PLAGIARISM.............................................................................................................iii
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………….........iv
ÖZ…………………………………………………………………….........................v
DEDICATION…………………………………………………………………….....vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………...….vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………………………………………..…viii
LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………..…....x
CHAPTER
1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………….1
2. THE THEORETICAL SCOPE..........................................................................8
2.1 Nationalism……………………………………………………………...8
2.1.1 Intellectual Approaches to Nation and Nationalism………..…….8
2.1.2 Nationalism in Modern Concepts……………………………..…10
2.2 The Relation between Memory and Nation(alism)……………………12
2.2.1 Invention of Tradition…………………………………………...14
2.2.2 Imagined Communities………………………………………….16
2.2.3 Social Memory…………………………………………………..19
3. HIPPODROME AND THE NATIONAL CELEBRATIONS………...…….22
3.1 HIPPODROME…………………………………………………….…..22
3.1.1 The New Capital City and The Emergence of a Need for The Hippodrome…………………………………………………..………..22
3.1.2 The Hippodrome and The Lörcher Plan…………………..……..31
3.1.3 The Horse Race Site Before the Construction of Hippodrome ………………………………….……………………………………...33
3.1.4 The Jansen Plan and the Enterprises for the First Celebrations at Hippodrome…………………………………..……………………...37
ix
3.1.5 The Situation of the Site before the Competition……..………...45
3.1.6 The International Competition for the Hippodrome and the Stadium Projects………………………..……………………………..50
3.1.6.1 Preparations……………..……………………………49
3.1.6.2 The Results of the Competition……………...……….54
3.1.7 The Construction Period…………………..……………………56
3.1.8 The Results of the Construction…………..…………………….63
3.1.8.1 Paolo Vietti-Violi’s Other Projects for Sport and National Festival Activities……………..…………………......64
3.1.8.2 Activities After Construction…………… .……....66
3.2 NATIONAL CELEBRATIONS…………………………………...….67
3.2.1 Early National Festivals………………..…………………...…..67
3.2.2 Main Aspects of the National Festivals………….………….…74
3.2.3 Tenth Anniversary Celebrations………………………..……...90
3.2.3.1 The Preparations………………..………..…………….91
3.2.3.2 The Spatial Organizations and the Celebrations at Ankara…………….………………..…………..……………...94
4. CONCLUSION……………………………………………….…...………..103
APPENDICES……………………………………………………………………..107
BIBILIOGRAPHY ……………………………………………………..…………136
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. 3.1. The Arch of Victory in front of the Turkish National Assembly Building………………………………………………………….... 28
Fig. 3.2. Program of 1924 Olympics at Paris……………………..………....30
Fig. 3.3. A part of Lörcher Plan showing the Hippodrome, Stadium, Festival Place and Roads…………………………………………….…….. 32
Fig. 3.4. M. Kemal Atatürk is watching the horse races,1921………….......34
Fig. 3.5. Wooden seating stands used before the construction of Hippodrome…………………………………………………..…….36
Fig. 3.6. The perspective of Jansen for the Hippodrome and the Parade Field………………………………………………………………...39
Fig. 3.7. Jansen’s plan no 2600: Ankara, Race Site and Stadium………………………………………………………….….41
Fig. 3.8. The part of Jansen Ankara Plan showing the Hippodrome, 1932………………………………………………………….……..44
Fig. 3.9. The Water Field Ankara Race Site…………………………...…….48
Fig. 3.10. Vietti-Violi’s Competititon Project, 1933…………........................55
Fig. 3.11. The Tribune of the President of Republic, 1937…………….……..59
Fig. 3.12. The First Class Tribunes of the Hippodrome, 1937……….……….61
Fig. 3.13. The Celebrations in 1920………………………….…….………...69
Fig. 3.14. The Parade of Soldiers who were going to war,1921……………...70
Fig. 3.15. Celebrations at the ramp road of İstiklal Avenue, 1926…………....72
Fig. 3.16. The headline of Cumhuriyet Newspaper, 1933………………...…..79
Fig. 3.17. The Work of a Baker, 28.10.1933…………………………………83
Fig. 3.18. The Sketch of the Hippodrome……………………………..……...86
Fig. 3.19. 19.05.1936, National Youth and Sport Festival………..……..……88
Fig. 3.20. Stamps……………………………………………………..…….…93
Fig. 3.21. Scouts and citizens waiting in front of the Assembly, 1933.............94
Fig. 3.22. D.D.Y. Muvakkat Monument, Ankara………………..……….…..95
xi
Fig. 3.23. The parade of the sportsmen………………………..……..……….97
Fig. 3.24. 29.10.1933, Festival of Republic, Ankara…………..…………......98
Fig. 3.25. The Public Podium at Ankara, 1935………………….…………..100
Fig. 3.26. The First Celebration at Hippodrome after the construction……...101
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Social memory is a shared memory which constitutes a social order by the help of the
images of the past. It is represented by some objects which store meanings in a
concentrated manner such as texts, monuments, buildings or memorials. Besides,
social memory is also embodied in regularly repeated and repeatable practices like
ceremonies, festivals and rites. These are socially constructed performances by which
the collected knowledge of the past is conveyed.
The main concern of this thesis is to explore the construction of social memory
through analyzing the national celebrations of the Early Republican Turkey. To
realize this construction process, which is mainly the outcome of the political forces
of that period, we will analyze the dynamics of social memory and its
representations. We will study on ‘invented traditions’ of this new nation to state
how new formalizations came forward in society’s structure and in which cases these
traditions effect the solidarity of imagined ideals of revolution.
The core issue of our interest on national celebrations is the relationship between
these commemorations and space. ‘Space’ is regarded as one of the frameworks of
collective remembering because significant ‘invented’ practices have taken place and
regularly replayed at specific sites to locate national meanings in the city. Therefore,
the problematic of this thesis will be analyzed with the case of Hippodrome of
Ankara which interacts closely with invented and performative activities of national
celebrations.
Moreover, our interest on the Hippodrome of Ankara will be meaningful for our
concern since the capital city was regarded as the reflection and representation space
for the modernization project of Turkey. Atatürk, the first President of the Turkish
Republic, and his comrades went forward to create a new ideology and symbols
which would permit Turkey to progress rapidly into the twentieth century. While
settling the new ideals, the state made efforts on reforms to provide a social change
and break with the bonds of the past. For this project, ‘spatial practices’ were one of
1
the devices that were introduced to society in order to maintain ‘national unity and
solidarity’. The relation between the commemorations and the site, which is the
Hippodrome of Ankara in our case, puts forward the ‘image making’ process of the
period. On the whole, this study on national celebrations operating at the
Hippodrome aims to explore how and what Turkish society choose to remember
about its past; how space and place, which are related with politics, incorporate
social memory; how these memories were transmitted to and interpreted by people
and what results emerged from these constructions in society and space.
This study is limited with the period between 1923 and 1938 because the effects of
political power in the construction of both the new capital city and the frame of
social memory were clearly operative. Then the archival studies based on written and
visual documents; laws and regulations; the institutional decisions and mediated
resources will be used for our analysis.
To understand the aspects which materialize the frame of national celebrations at
Hippodrome, the relation between memory and the nation will be analyzed.
Therefore, the second chapter seeks to explain firstly the aspects of nationalism that
operates in the nation-building process. Then the creations and inventions that
concretize the imagination of nationalism will be discussed throughout studies of
specific critics.
The national celebrations and the Hippodrome case of the capital city are suggested
as the products of those inventions and memory projects. Thus we will focus on Eric
Hobsbawm who is a key figure in analyzing national celebrations. In his introduction
to The Invention of Tradition, Hobsbawm indicates that the nature of nations can be
analyzed by national traditions which are a type of invented traditions. The term
‘invented tradition’ is used for invented, constructed and formally instituted
traditions. He defines these traditions as:
‘invented tradition’ is taken to mean a set of practices, normally governed by overtly or tacitly accepted rules and of a ritual or symbolic nature, which seek to inculcate certain values and norms of behavior by repetition, which automatically implies continuity with the past.1
1 Eric Hobsbawm and Terrance Ranger, “Introduction: Inventing Traditions” 1983, The Invention of Tradition, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), p. 1.
2
He is perfectly correct in stating that new symbols and devices such as the national
anthem and the national flag came into existence in parallel with national movements
and national states. The invention of traditions sometimes gives references to old
ones and borrows from those rituals, symbolism and moral exhortation. To
understand the nationalist movement of the Turkish Republic, this study will explore
how the symbolism enters into politics, how political actors consciously and
unconsciously manipulate symbols and how this symbolic dimension relates to the
material bases of political power.
Benedict Anderson’s famous book, Imagined Communities, will be another source
for our assumptions on nationalism and memory. His explanations on the ‘era of
nationalism’ will make clear that nation is imagined and some agents support its
permanence and reality. Beside the formations of nations that we meet with in daily
life, Anderson’s conceptions on the public ceremonies and their memorial sites will
unfold that the national celebrations are one way of imagination that create a link
between the past and the future.
Paul Connerton who considers memory as a cultural artifact will be another key
figure in the thesis. In his famous book ‘How Societies Remember’, he sought how
the memory of groups was conveyed and sustained. Most of the studies on collective
memory have projected the importance of literal sources in conveying the memory.
On the other hand Connerton mainly focuses on the influence of bodily practices and
recollection in remembrance of society. He explains how non-inscribed kinds of
practices are transmitted in tradition and as a tradition. For him,
If there is such a thing as social memory, I shall argue, we are likely to find it in commemorative ceremonies; commemorative ceremonies prove to be commemorative only in so far as they are performative; performativity cannot be thought without a concept of habit; and habit cannot be thought without a notion of bodily automatisms.2
Thus, our conception on the interaction between space and commemorational
ceremonies will be set throughout the research on the events which consist of ritual
actions. What Connerton puts forward in that context is that rituals are expressive
acts only by virtue of their conspicuous regularity. He points out: “rituals are
2 Paul Connerton, “Introduction,” 1992, How Societies Remember (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press), p. 5.
3
formalized acts, and tend to be stylized, stereotyped and repetitive”,3 and adds that
they imply continuity with the past. The sociological position of rituals puts forward
the role of shaping collective memory. They show us how social stability and
equilibrium are constituted. Rituals have their own liturgy which performs so
powerfully. The linguistic options have been abandoned so that choice of words,
syntax and style are markedly restricted than daily language.4 The body which is in
certain pose and movements are described in the program of ritual.
The political rituals are always used to show the ideological contexts in a symbolic
way as seen in national festivals. Their aim is to call our attention to the fact that
there is nothing automatic about entering the public record or being remembered.
Iwona Irwin-Zarecka points out that:
What memory projects do is to bring the idea into foreground of public discourse with rarely matched clarity. They expose the presence of social and political control over memory to the public-at-large. Memory projects reclaim more than a past; they reclaim the power to define it.5
The symbolic resources and the official canon of memory projects have stress on
society to have respect on remembrance. Moreover, rituals have effect on people’s
comprehension of politics. Kretzer states that:
Politicians design and employ rituals to arouse popular emotions in support of their legitimacy and to drum up popular enthusiasm for their policies. But, by the same token, rituals are also important for revolutionary groups who must elicit powerful emotions to mobilize people to revolt.6
All festivals provide a sphere which includes power relationships between below and
above. It is also reflected in government-organized, institutionalized ceremonies in
which traditional social habits, themes, symbols, identities and time are organized.
According to K.Friedrich the national and military festivals have two most essential
elements: ritual and propaganda. In national festivals ritual succeeds to create a sense
of unity and concretize the abstract, symbolic notion of nation. The display of 3 Connerton, p. 44. 4 Connerton, p. 60. 5 Iwona Irwin-Zarecka, “Dynamics of Memory Work” 1994, Frames Of Remembrance: The Dynamics of Collective Memory, (New Brunswick and London: Tranaction Publishers), p. 133. 6 D.Kertzer, “The Power of Rites” 1988, Ritual, Politics and Power, (London and New Heaven: Yale University Press), p. 14.
4
military powers has an important political role to show the security and permanence
of the new nation to citizens and enemies.7
The power constructs the remembering of the past and represents the recollections by
means of textual resources such as a space, a museum and a monument. Pierre Nora
believes that such places are the sites of memory where (cultural) memory
crystallizes itself.8 In that sense, he points out:
Sites of memory are artificial, and deliberately fabricated. Their object is to help us recalling the past, in order to make living in the modern world meaningful: Thus, sites of memory are identity markers for nations, regions and social groups. Sites of memory have been acquired constantly by social groups and individuals in order to achieve specific goals, for instance to build nations, or generally speaking: to construct specific identities. So the main purpose of studying site of memory is to deconstruct virtually created social identities, which have been used for political purposes.9
After setting this conceptual frame, our interest throughout the research will focus on
the national celebrations at the Hippodrome of Ankara. Firstly, the construction of
Hippodrome and its significance in the capital city will be explored. Here,
Hippodrome is suggested as the site for national celebrations of the capital city and
an important part of newly planned Ankara. As it is understood from the archival
documents that the construction of Hippodrome is actually based on the
consciousness of politicians on national identity and image of the nation-state despite
the difficulty of creating a modern parade site together with the Stadium Complex in
that period.
The importance of national identity and image of the nation-state were also shared by
Prof. Hermann Jansen who won the planning competition of Ankara in 1929. In his
plan objectives, he considered the panorama, climate and historical references and
summarized them in three titles: 1) the desire of time, 2) to study for national identity
and unity, 3) the new techniques and financial problems. Jansen pointed out that the
largest area was allocated to Stadium and Hippodrome. He observed that sport
7 Karin Friedrich, “Introduction” 2000, Festival Culture in German and Europe: New Approaches to European Festival Culture, (Lewiston, Lampeter: Edwin Mellen Press), p. 11. 8 P.Nora, 1989, Sites of Memory, volume 7, quoted in J.Feichtinger, May 2002, “Aspects on Collective Memory: Maurice Halbwachs”, [Internet, WWW], ADDRESS: http://www.nationalismproject.org/suggestions [Accessed: 04 October 2002]. 9 Nora, 1989.
5
facilities had an important role in evoking the feelings of nationhood and the
celebrations of Republican Festivals managed to gather thousands of people.10
The first part of the third chapter seeks to state the construction process of the
Hippodrome. We will follow the transformations of the site from a simple horse race
site to a modern celebration site which had direct effects on society. The design of
Hippodrome explores not only the architectural elements but also political and social
elements of Modernization.
The second part of the third chapter begins with the invention of national
celebrations of the Republican Regime and its effects on breaking the bonds with the
memory of the Ottoman. Here we will realize that the frame of celebrations had a
development process which needed an institutional back-up. The program of the
festivals were organized by the statesmen and performed over the whole country at
the same time.
The second part of the third chapter will be finalized with the Tenth Anniversary of
the Turkish Republic. When we look at the programs of the national celebrations of
Turkey we realize that the statesmen of the Early Republican Period knew how
important rituals and symbolism were in political policies and systems were. The
tenth anniversary of the Turkish Republic is a satisfactory example for this issue. The
organization committee of the festival used ‘invented traditions’ in every aspect from
space to acts and Hippodrome was a stage for all those practices.
Above all, this thesis is structured by the construction of the ritual site namely the
Hippodrome of Ankara through official records of the period between 1923 and
1938. Although there is a chronological order in our style of narrating, the story of
the construction of Hippodrome and the national celebrations are separated. Beside
national celebrations, we mention the construction of the Hippodrome to unfold the
understanding of the Early Republican Period.
The transformations of the city and developments in the Turkish society and politics
could not change the scope of the Hippodrome area which is laid out in the center of
Ankara for seventy years. It is still being controlled and protected by regulations and
10 Ankara İmar Planı, 1937, (İstanbul: Alaaddin Kıral Basımevi), pp. 6-5.
6
laws. It is worth to analyze such a site to understand the frame of Turkish nation and
its dynamics.
7
CHAPTER 2
THE THEORETICAL SCOPE
In this chapter, it is intended to handle some necessary definitions and concepts to
identify the main frame of this thesis. The constitution period of the Turkish
Republic between 1923 and 1938 has been studied many times throughout
sociological and historical terms and our case study is directly related with these
interdisciplinary issues.
The most important aspect of this study is its intention to combine ‘theory’ with
‘practice’. Though ‘national festivals’ form the base for the practical part, it also
comes with its own theoretical issues which are ‘nation(alism)’ and ‘memory’. These
interdisciplinary subjects have a powerful interaction that becomes also an aspect of
the architectural discourse at many times. In that sense, we will briefly examine the
terms of nation(alism), memory and the connection between them to unfold our
problematic.
2.1 Nationalism
When we study nationalism, it is realized that different theorists have made different
explanations on the same issues. In order to set up the theoretical framework of this
thesis and to limit our scope, we are not going to review all the literature on
nationalism. Instead, some specific theorists, who emphasized the importance of
festivals in nationalistic agenda, will be referred.
2.1.1 Intellectual Approaches to Nation and Nationalism
Montserrat Guibernau believes that nationalism can only be understood if its two
major dimensions are taken on board. In her book ‘Nationalisms’ she notes that these
dimensions are nationalism’s political character and its role in creating identity.11 At
11 Montserrat Guibernau, “Conclusion” 1996, Nationalisms: The Nation-State and the Nationalism in the Twentieth Century, (Cambridge: Polity Press), p. 141.
8
the same time she argues that the origin of nations is one of the most controversial
issue in discussing nationalism and its political implications in particular. She states
that:
There are two main positions: First, the assumption that the nation is something natural. (…) The second perspective holds that the nation and nationalism are modern phenomena. According to Gellner, nationalism is explicable as an inevitable, or at least as a natural, corollary of some specific aspects of modernization. It is a phenomenon connected with the emergence of industrial society. Giddens understands both the nation and nationalism as distinctive properties of modern states and locates the emergence of nationalism in the late eighteenth century and after. Anderson also argues that nationality, ‘nation-ness’ and nationalism are cultural artifacts created towards the end of eighteenth century.12
It is not easy to frame an analytical structure for the studies on nation and
nationalism. However, as Guibernau mentioned, there are some intellectuals who
believe nation is not something given or natural, instead, it is something created and
constructed. Anthony Smith pays attention to the characteristics of nations which
were created by ‘design’ outside West and taking Turkey as a part of that
formulation. He states that the nations of Western Europe were largely unplanned
and acquired almost by accident while the ones outside the West were largely the
result of nationalist purposes and movements.13
Moreover, for Smith, the modernist paradigms of nationalism have been influenced
by Marxism, crowd psychology, Weberian and Durkheimian streams. Here, our
concern will be on Durkheim because his approach to community points out the
importance of religion and commemorating in national life. Durkheim claims all
societies feel the need to reaffirm and renew themselves periodically through
collective rites and ceremonies and there is no difference between Christian and
Jewish festivals and reunion of citizens for remembering a national event.14
Eric Hobsbawm and Benedict Anderson are the contemporary theorists on
nationalism. Smith, in his critical survey on recent theories of nations and
nationalism, states that two seminal work on Nationalism, i.e. ‘Invention of
12 Guibernau, “The Political Character of Nationalism,”1996, p. 49. 13 Anthony Smith, “Nations by Design?” 1991, National Identity, (UK: Penguin Books), p. 100. 14 Anthony Smith, “The Rise of Classical Modernism,” 1998, Nationalism and Modernism, (London: Routledge), pp. 16-11.
9
Tradition’ of E. Hobsbawm and ‘Imagined Communities’ of B. Anderson stemmed
from Marxist tradition, but sought to move beyond its usual concerns with political
economy into the realm of culture by reworking and supplementing them with
themes drawn from the analysis of narratives and discourse developed by
‘postmodernist’ deconstruction.” He goes on to state that:
For both [Anderson and Hobsbawm] nations and nationalism are constructs and cultural artifacts; the task of the analyst is to uncover their forms and contents, in order to reveal the needs and interests of those elites and strata which benefit or use their narratives. Hence, in both books a modernist project is overlaid by ‘postmodernist’ themes and language. 15
2.1.2 Nationalism in Modern Concepts
Our concern on the Early Republican Turkey can be elaborated as a period that
nationalism considered as “an ideological movement for attaining and maintaining
autonomy, unity and identity of a nation.”16
The modern conception of nationalism is mostly discussed with its close conjunction
with the emergence of the modern, territorial, sovereign and participatory state. John
Breuilly highlights the importance of a state for nationalism in his words:
“Nationalism is inconceivable without the state. The central nationalist goal is the
autonomy (usually meaning establishment of a sovereign state in the national
territory) justified in the name of the ‘nation’.”17
It is not only the nineteenth century that nation-states such as Germany and Italy
emerged in Europe but also movements of twentieth century came with nationalistic
goals all over the world. Guibernau states, “In the twentieth century, the nation-state
remains the primary actor in international relations; being a sovereign-state seems to
be the chief international status symbol as well as to confer entrance the world
15 Smith, 1998, Nationalism and Modernism, p. 117. 16 Smith, 1991, National Identity, p. 74. 17 John Breuilly, “The State and Nationalism,” in Monstrerrat Guibernau and John Hutchinson (ed.), 2001, Understanding Nationalism (USA: Blackwell Publishers), p. 32.
10
society.”18 She expresses the differences between nation, state, nation-state and
nationalism and makes the definition of nation-state as such:
The nation-state is a modern phenomenon, characterized by the formation of a kind of state which has the monopoly of what it claims to be the legitimate use of force within a demarcated territory and seeks to unite the people subjected to its rule by means of homogenization, creating a common culture, symbols, values, reviving traditions and myths of origin, and sometimes inventing them. The main differences between a nation and a nation-state, when the nation and the state do not coincide, as they hardly ever do, are that, the nation-state seeks to create a nation and develop a sense of community stemming from it. While the nation has a common culture, values and symbols, the nation-state has an objective the creation of a common culture, symbols and values. (…) While the people who form a nation have a sense of fatherland and feel attached to a territory, the nation-state may be result of a treaty or the will of politicians who decide where to draw the line between states.19
As mentioned above, the fundamental issue of the nation-state is based on the
‘people’ who are united under its ‘sovereignty’. The relations between the nation-
state and its citizens are represented by written constitutions and supported by
institutions. Breuilly states:
The formation of the specialized, sovereign, territorial, public state is the institutional context within which the idea of nationalism appears appropriate as ideology, both in intellectual terms and as a way of mobilizing support, the concept of political modernization places great emphasis on institutions as shaping ideas and actions.20
This authority of the state reflected the citizens as elections that represents the
opinion of public; taxes, rights and duties. Moreover, “The modern state also has the
power to control two elements that, through their role in reproducing and modifying
culture, become crucial in the homogenization of the state’s population: the media
and education.”21
In the Turkish case, the mass media and the educational institutions of the Early
Republican Period were structured to constitute a national identity and culture. The
primary concern of Republican projects was creating a modern and secular nation-
state and its citizens. The ‘national identity’ and ‘common culture’ would only bind 18 Guibernau, “The Political Character of Nationalism,” p. 57. 19 Guibernau, “The Political Character of Nationalism,” pp. 48-47. 20 Breuilly, p. 51. 21 Guibernau, “The Political Character of Nationalism,” p. 58.
11
citizens to their homeland and form the social cohesion of the members. According
to Smith the fundamental features of national identity that are common in all types of
nations can be summarized as the historic territory or homeland; common myths and
historical memories; a common, mass public culture; common legal rights and duties
for all members; and a common economy with territorial mobility for members.22
The word ‘common’ is the key figure that Smith specifically mentions since it
signifies the will of people and unity for the ideals. This statement is also a part of
nationalism that allows people to separate and distinguish themselves from ‘others’
and recognize themselves as a part of ‘we’.
Culture is more than an ideology for nationalism. Symbolism, mythology, language
and consciousness are also giving meaning to nations. The collective cultural
identities are not only formed by national institutions but also by representation and
“cultural artifacts” which are fabricated by “cultural engineers”.23 In this respect,
Breuilly points out, “The standardization and specialization of ‘culture’ under
modern conditions made plausible the argument that the ‘people’ were not, in fact, an
accidental collection of individuals but rather a cultural collective, a nation.”24
To sum, it should be emphasized that a nation can be defined as “a named human
population sharing an historic territory, common myths and historical memories, a
mass, public culture, a common economy and common legal rights and duties for all
members”25 and “In non-Western instances of the formation of nations, the
specifically nationalist element, as an ideological movement, assumes greater
importance.”26
2.2 The Relation between Memory and Nation(alism)
Before dealing with memory we will point out the importance of memory for
nationalism to expose the significance of national festivals. As our study mainly
focuses on the modernist approach of nationalism, festivals are taken as a part of the
nation-construction process. 22 Smith, 1991, National Identity, p. 13. 23 Smith, 2000, The Nation in the History, pp. 57-53. 24 Breuilly, p. 38. 25 Smith, 1991, National Identity, p. 13. 26 Smith, 1991, National Identity, p. 101.
12
Nationalism and its aspects are abstract things that have to be imagined in the minds
of citizens. These imaginations need some vehicles to become daily objects of
masses. Smith argues that national symbols are more potent than nationalistic
principles to realize a power on citizens. He adds:
These [national symbols] give concrete meaning and visibility to the abstractions of nationalism. The representations and images of the nation exert a profound influence over large numbers of people, exactly because they can be very widely disseminated by the media. In each of these media, specific images of the nation and its liberation, its heroic past, and its glorious future can be created and purveyed, so that the nation ceases to be the abstract property of intellectuals and becomes the immemorial imagined community of all those designated as its members and citizens. Through opera, music, drama, novels, films and television, artists have continually conveyed the power and tangibility of their nations through a dramatic and artistically authentic re-creation of their heroic pasts…27
This re-creation and inventions of images of nationalism has a discourse and
interrelated language that includes visible attributes like “flags, anthems, parades,
coinage, capital cities, oaths, folk costumes, museums of folklore, war memorials,
ceremonies of remembrance for the national dead, passports, frontiers” and hidden
aspects like “the countryside, popular heroes and heroines, fairy tales, forms of
etiquette, styles of architecture, arts and crafts, modes of town planning, legal
procedures, educational practices and military codes.”28 They are all shared by
members of the nation and assure the continuity of an abstract community. Smith
states that the underlying sentiments and aspirations of that nationalist language and
symbols evoke are territory, history and community.29
Symbols and rituals which are decisive factors of national festivals have important
roles in the creation of national identity. They are the devices of distinguishing a
nation’s members from outsiders and heightening people’s awareness of, and
sensitivity to their community. These symbols and rituals are also creating a
consciousness by giving strength to individuals in a circumstance where they can
speak a common language and participate in the same ritual. Since the symbols and
27 Smith, 2000, The Nation in the History, p. 73. 28 Smith, 1991, National Identity, p. 77. 29 Smith, 1991, National Identity, p. 78.
13
rituals have value for the people, who recognize them; they provide a unity and mask
the differences in the group. 30
There is a danger in usage of rituals and symbols that they have to be readapted and
reinterpreted according to the context for not to be ‘empty shells of fragmentary
memories’. The continuous flow between individuals and symbols in a circumstance
which develops and changes cause not merely to accept already established symbols,
but have constantly re-create and attribute new meanings.31
In that sense, the seminal work of Hobsbawm and Ranger, The Invention of
Tradition, can clarify the relation between national discourse and these creations.
2.2.1 Invention of Tradition
In his introduction to The Invention of Tradition, Eric Hobsbawm indicates that the
national phenomenon cannot be adequately investigated without careful attention to
the ‘invention of tradition’. As much as historians who take invented traditions as
symptoms and evidences for their researches, social anthropologists and students of
human sciences are also interested in these practices hence they have an
interdisciplinary field of study.32
For Hobsbawm nation is a creation of nationalism. He states that a modern nation
consists of constructs and is associated with appropriate and fairly recent symbols or
suitably tailored discourse such as national history. There is a paradox that modern
nations claim to be the opposite of novel, namely rooted in the remotest antiquity,
and the opposite of constructed, to be natural.33 However, modern nations must
include ‘invented’ component of concepts of the national phenomena. He related his
ideas with revolutionary movements which backed their innovations by reference to
a ‘people’s past’ and writes:
30 Guibernau, “National Identity,” pp. 84-80. 31 Guibernau, “National Identity,” pp. 84-83. 32 Eric Hobsbawm, “Introduction: Inventing Traditions,” in E. Hobsbawm and Terrance Ranger (ed.), 1983, The Invention of Tradition (Great Britain: Cambridge University Press), pp. 14-12. 33 Hobsbawm, p.14.
14
The element of invention is particularly clear here, since the history which became part of the fund of knowledge or the ideology of nation, state or movement is not what has actually been preserved in popular memory, but what has been selected, written, pictured, popularized and institutionalized by those whose function is to do so.34
In that sense, the term ‘tradition’ also became actually invented, constructed and
formally instituted practice that emerges in a less easily traceable manner within a
brief and dateable period and establish itself with great rapidity. Thus, national
traditions are one type of invented traditions and Hobsbawm defines this issue as
follows:
‘Invented tradition’ is taken to mean a set of practices, normally governed by overtly or tacitly accepted rules and of a ritual or symbolic nature, which seek to inculcate certain values and norms of behavior by repetition, which automatically implies continuity with the past. In fact, where possible, they normally attempt to establish continuity with a suitable historic past. A striking example is the deliberate choice of Gothic style for the nineteenth century rebuilding of the British Parliament…35
The case of construction of Nazi symbolism and the Nuremberg party rallies is a well
documented example of inventing traditions. They were officially instituted and
planned ceremonials constructed by a single initiator, Hitler. Thus as Hobsbawm
argues, “inventing traditions is a process of formalization, ritualization, characterized
by reference to past, if only by imposing repetition.”36 The importance of ‘old’
traditions for ‘new’ ones cannot be denied as we are still meeting them in folksongs,
customs or combination of ancient or religious materials in modern nations. This is
an adaptation of old traditions which are selected and designed for new purposes in
new conditions. Hobsbawn points out that the formations of new traditions have been
significant in the past 200 years and writes:
… we should expect it [invented tradition] to occur more frequently when a rapid transformation of society weakens or destroys the social patterns for which ‘old’ traditions had been designed, producing new ones to which they were not applicable, or when such old traditions and their institutional carriers and promulgators no longer prove sufficiently adaptable and flexible, or are otherwise eliminated.37
34 Hobsbawm, p. 13. 35 Hobsbawm, p. 1. 36 Hobsbawm, p. 4. 37 Hobsbawm, p. 5.
15
The widespread use of invented traditions in Europe is evaluated in the last chapter
under the title “Mass-producing Traditions” by Hobsbawm. He expresses the rapid
and profound social transformations of the period [forty years before the First World
War] caused mass-producing traditions which the public was ready to tune in. They
were not only official new public ceremonies, festivals or national symbols but also
performances halfway between political and social in character such as May Day
celebrations and international sport activities. For Hobsbawn, these new devices
ensure or express social cohesion and identity to structure social relations.38
Moreover, the state and society became increasingly inseparable and people were
transformed to citizens whose collective actions were officially recognized. 39
On the whole, Hobsbawm argues that invented traditions have three overlapping
types. They are:
a) those establishing or symbolizing cohesion or the membership of groups, real or artificial communities, b) those establishing or legitimizing institutions, status or relations of authority, and c) those whose main purpose was socialization, the inculcation of beliefs, value systems and conventions of behavior.
He goes on to state that, when traditions of types B and C were certainly devised, we
should suggest that the type A was prevalent. In that sense, the nation belongs to type
A and can be considered as an institution which was implicit in or flows from a sense
of identification with a community.40
2.2.2 Imagined Communities
Benedict Anderson is one of the critics whose approach to nationalism seeks to
emphasize the subjective and cultural dimensions.41 His main problem is the
adequacy of Marxist theory in nationalism, so he suggests for “a more satisfactory
interpretation of the ‘anomaly’ of nationalism.”42 He tries to prove that the “era of
38 Hobsbawn, “Mass-producing Traditions,” p. 263. 39 Hobsbawn, “Mass-producing Traditions,” p. 264. 40 Hobsbawm, “Introduction,” p. 9. 41 Smith, 1998, Nationalism and Modernism, p. 131. 42 Benedict Anderson, “Introduction,” 1991, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (London-NewYork: Verso), p. 4.
16
nationalism” has not come to an end and nation-ness is still the most universally
legitimate value in the political life at the end of the twentieth century. 43
In that sense, Anderson regards nations and nationalism as cultural artifacts of a
particular kind which arose at the end of the eighteenth century. He states that after
cultural artifacts had been created by historical forces, they became ‘modular’ and
can be transplanted to varying circumstances to merge or be merged with ideological
and political groups.44 In addition, Anderson rejects regarding nationalism as an
ideology; instead he takes it belonging to ‘kinship’ or ‘religion’. 45
Therefore, he proposes an anthropological definition of nation as “an imagined
political community- imagined as inherently limited and sovereign.”46 He explains
that the nation is imagined because its members will never know, meet or even hear
of most of their fellow-members but the image of their communion lives in the minds
of each of them.47
He goes on to explain the ways of imagination as limited, sovereign, and community.
Smith summarizes Anderson’s ideas as follows:
It is imagined as limited, even if its boundaries are elastic- and therefore as one of a comity of nations. It is imagined as sovereign because, in an age of enlightenment and revolution, nations want freedom and this means possessing a sovereign state. It is imagined as a community, because ‘the nation is always conceived as a deep, horizontal comradeship’.48
Finally Anderson points out an interesting fact that the fraternity of millions of
people makes them willingly die for their limited imaginings over the past two
centuries. He calls this fact as the ‘central problem posed by nationalism’ and
suggests investigating this problem firstly in cultural roots of nationalism.49
For Anderson, the dynastic realm and religious community are the two cultural
systems that preceded nationalism. The idea that makes Anderson investigate these 43 Anderson, “Introduction,” p. 3. 44 Anderson, “Introduction,” p.4. 45 Anderson, “Introduction,” p. 5. 46 Anderson, “Introduction,” pp. 6-5. 47 Anderson, “Introduction,” p. 6. 48 Smith, 1998, Nationalism and Modernism, p. 132. 49 Anderson, “Introduction,” p. 7.
17
cultural roots is to expose reason of their plausibility in their ages. Death and the
Babel were the most effective fatalities of the age that caused the emergence of
nationalism.
He emphasizes the importance of public ceremonies for cenotaphs and tombs of the
Unknown Soldiers and states that these constructions are filled with ‘ghostly national
imaginings’ in modern secular age.50 The nations use collective memory and
commemorations to keep the memory alive and “transform fatality into continuity,
contingency into meaning.” So they give a political expression loom out of an
immemorial past and glide into a limitless future. 51 In that sense, for example, the
banks named ‘Etibank and Sümerbank’ of Turkey are the commemorations, that are
expressing that the new state sees Hittites and Sumerians as its ancestors.52
In addition to dynastic realm and religious community cosmological time is also a
fundamental cultural conception which “undergoes radical transformations before
nations and nationalism could have any plausibility.”53 The pre-modern,
cosmological idea of time was “simultaneity-along-time” and it was replaced with
“homogenous, empty time”54 in early modern age. According to this modern
conception, the time was “transverse, cross-time, marked not by prefiguring and
fulfillment, but temporal coincidence, and measured by clock and calendar.”55 For
Anderson, this transformation was so important for the birth of the imagined
community of the nation and can be best seen in two forms, i.e. novel and
newspaper.
The community of a novel and newspaper was an imagined one and made people to
identify themselves with actions and feelings. They were a simultaneous meeting of
people who would never meet. Indeed, the newspapers connected people with a
calenderically dated, collectively consumed, and daily but silent ‘mass-
ceremonies.’56 Anderson states that the print materials laid bases for national
50 Anderson, “Cultural Roots,” p. 9. 51 Anderson, “Cultural Roots,” p. 11. 52Anderson, “Cultural Roots,” p. 12. 53 Smith, 1998, Nationalism and Modernism, p. 133. 54 Anderson, “Cultural Roots,” p. 24. 55 Anderson, “Cultural Roots,” p. 24. 56 Anderson, “Cultural Roots,” pp. 36-24.
18
consciousness and formed the embryo of national imagined community57 and notes:
“The seeds of Turkish nationalism are easily detectable in the appearance of a lively
vernacular press in Istanbul in the 1870s”58
Besides, the ‘love’ for a nation is represented in many ways such as the national
poetry, fictions, movies, music, celebrations and plastic arts. Anderson states that this
situation shows that nation came to be imagined, and once imagined, it was modeled,
adapted and transformed.59 The link between the nation and its images and
representations gave it reality and concrete power because it could be felt and acted
by these inventions of imaginations.
2.2.3 Social Memory
Paul Connerton is one of the thinkers who studies on the memory of groups. He
believes that participants in any social order must presuppose a shared memory
which is conveyed and sustained by performances.60 His concern on social memory
is differentiated from many other thinkers by the issue ‘performance’. Connerton
considers performativity as the structural basis of social memory and relates it with
being operative and legitimate. In addition, he points out that recollection is the main
operative aspect of social memory and states that recollection is at work in two
distinct areas of social activity: in ‘commemorative ceremonies and in bodily
practices’.61 These two activities contain meaningful actions and construct a coding
which refers to a past and still present.
National festivals are ‘socially performed activities’ and ‘commemorative’ in origin.
They are a good instance for the control of a society’s memory and the organization
of national festivals is a part of historical reconstruction. Connerton points out that
the practice of historical reconstruction is independent from social memory but can
give shape to the memory of social groups. He adds that this interaction between
memory and historical reconstruction occurs when a state apparatus is used in a
57Anderson, “Origins of National Consciousness,” p. 44. 58 Anderson, “Creole Pioneers,” p. 75. 59 Anderson, “Patriotism and Racism,” p. 141. 60 Connerton, “Introduction,” pp. 3-1. 61 Connerton, “Social Memory,” p. 7.
19
systemic way to deprive its citizens of their memory such all totalitarianisms and
larger powers which use a method of forgetting to deprive small countries of their
national consciousness.62 In that sense, meaningfulness and legitimacy are becoming
the important aspects of social life for identifying the socially performed actions.
According to Connerton the society conserve its recollections by referring them to
the material milieu of the social space. The social spaces of a group give the society
the illusion of not changing and of rediscovering the past in the present because of
their relative stability.63 Therefore, our memories can find the possibilities of evoking
and reappearing to locate themselves in mental and material spaces of the groups.
While we are setting our conceptual frame, we see that Connerton makes the term
‘social memory’ central to his inquiry. On the other side, Halbwachs is also
important for his studies on ‘collective memory’. Connerton criticizes Halbwachs’
studies on memory and points out that Halbwachs rejected the separation of memory
of individuals and groups. He adds that “Halbwachs makes the idea of collective
memory central to his inquiry, does not see the images of the past and recollected
knowledge of the past are conveyed and sustained by (more or less) ritual
performances.”64
Connerton believes that all ritual actions are invented at some point and remain in
existence over historical span. He states that:
Thus it is now abundantly clear that in the modern period national elites have invented rituals that claim continuity with an appropriate historic past, organizing ceremonies, parades and mass gatherings, and constructing new ritual spaces. This is true of Europe as of the Middle East.65
We realize that Connerton and Hobsbawm are compromising on the invention of
commemorative activities for the ideological and political functions. With the same
sense, Connerton notes that political rituals are invented as a form of symbolic
representation and occur at special places at fixed times. Although this kind of ritual
have particular concepts of what a society is and how society functions, their
62 Connerton, “Social Memory,” p. 14. 63 Connerton, “Social Memory,” p. 37 64 Connerton, “Social Memory,” p. 38. 65 Connerton, “Commemorative Ceremonies,” p. 51.
20
articulation can be developed in content and significance over the course of time. 66
The rituals are also the focus of national festivals with their ability to execute their
formalism and performativity in large part. They refer to prototypical persons and
events which have historical or mythological existence on repeatable dates.67
Connerton’s inquiry on performative commemorative ceremonies depends on the
bodiliness aspect of social memory. He believes that the body has recently received
attention as a bearer of social and political meanings. The power and the authority
should be expressed through certain postures in all cultures such as sitting in an
elevated position in any type of meeting. Thus, body which is both constituted and
constructed socially has great importance for the meaningful acts of performances in
conveying and sustaining memory.68
66 Connerton, “Commemorative Ceremonies,” pp. 54-50. 67 Connerton, “Commemorative Ceremonies,” p. 61. 68 Connerton, “Bodily Practices,” p. 104.
21
CHAPTER 3
HIPPODROME AND THE NATIONAL CELEBRATIONS
3.1 HIPPODROME
3.1.1 The New Capital City and The Emergence of a Need for The
Hippodrome
The de facto capital city of Turkey was Ankara during the Independence War and
after the establishment of the National Assembly. The attempts on the legitimacy of
Ankara as the official capital city of Turkey came to an end by a draft law which was
presented to the Assembly by the Prime Minister on the 9th of September, 1923. The
members of the Assembly reached an important decision to assign “Ankara as the
capital city of Turkey”, on the 13th of October, 1923.69 This decision was followed by
the declaration of the Republic on the 29th of October in 1923 and ‘modernization
and civilization project’ of the ‘New Regime’ started. This analysis on this
constitution period between 1923 and 1938 will focus on the nation-construction
process of the new government in terms of its social memory by exposing the idea
behind the national festivals at the Hippodrome of Ankara.
The new capital city of Turkey was decided as not only the center of the new
government but also it was believed that it would represent the image of the new
political order which could only be realized by social and spatial arrangements. Thus,
the politicians had an overt control on the city to realize the new ideals of the state.
Although choosing Ankara as the new capital was an internal issue and there were
some disagreements raised by different groups, it was discussed and handled as a
major problem especially by the foreign nations because of the Turkish
Government’s will to transfer the embassies to Ankara. In 1924, the German
Ambassador to Turkey, Rudolf Nadolny prepared a report to understand the real
intention of the government after making some interviews with various key people 69 Prof. Dr. Gülnihal Bozkurt, Kasım 1995, “Ankara’nın Başkent Olmasına Dair Bir Alman Belgesi,” Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi Vol. 33, pp. 762-757.
22
such as the Prime Minister, İsmet Pasha. İsmet Pasha told Nadolny that “The
rebuilding of Turkey can only be based on the national aspects of Anatolia. In this
regard, we do not go back to Istanbul and will stay at the center of Anatolia.” He
went on to state that the construction of buildings and roads were all the signs of this
desire and it was hoped to reach a modern Ankara in five years time. According to
İsmet Pasha, the transferring of the Embassies and the members of the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs from Istanbul to Ankara was a good representation of The Turkish
Government’s political choice. That decision had already encouraged not only the
construction processes but also the businessmen who began to come to Ankara.70 It
should be suggested that reconstructing Ankara as ‘the capital city of the Turkish
Republic was not considered as only a technical problem, but also an important
political issue during the Early Republican period. Gönül Tankut suggests the capital
city of the new Republic was in fact a true representation of the Turkish revolution.
In her book Bir Başkentin İmarı: Ankara, she writes that:
The construction of a capital city was not only a technical process. The beginning of the development, especially in accordance with a plan, was a political choice and the future of the process was closely related with the political decisions. (…) The construction of the Republican capital can be counted as one of the revolutions of the founder of the Republic, thus the foundation of Ankara was a kind of concretization of Atatürk’s modernization principles.71
In addition, Tomris Elvan Ergut’s studies on the Early Republican Architecture will
be quite useful to understand the relation between architecture and ‘nation-
construction’. According to Ergut,
…an examination of the process of building a national capital, as in Turkey, could be particularly illuminating in understanding the significance of its architecture, and the built environment in general, in relation to the idea of nationalism and national identity. It also permits us to question the ways in which architecture and the built environment are supposedly ‘explained’ through the notion of ‘national meanings’.72
70 Bozkurt, p.760. 71 Gönül Tankut, “Giriş,” 1990, Bir Başkentin İmarı Ankara: (1929-1939), (Ankara: Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi ), p.2. 72 Tomris Elvan Ergut, “The Display of Turkish Architecture,” 1999, Making a National Architecture: Architecture and the Nation-State in Early Republican Turkey, (Michigan: UMI, A Bell & Howell Company), p.112.
23
As, Sibel Bozdoğan mentions, the revolutionary ideals of the Kemalist regime in
Turkey were an elite-based and top-to-bottom character.73 The politicians were the
main social agents in the construction of built environment. Sibel Bozdoğan states
that the architectural culture of the early Turkish Republic illustrates how high
modernism as an ideology appealed particularly to planners, engineers, architects,
scientists, and technicians who wanted to use state power to bring about huge,
utopian changes in people’s work habits, living patterns, moral conduct and
worldview.74 In Modernism and Nation Building, she writes:
Modern architecture was imported as both a visible symbol and an effective instrument of this radical program to create a thoroughly Westernized, modern, and secular new nation dissociated from the country’s own Ottoman and Islamic past. In this respect, architecture in the early republican Turkey can be looked at as a literally “concrete” manifestation of the high modernist vision. 75
The government organized all its institutions in order to create a ‘new social order’.
The Ministry of Immigration, Public Improvements and Inhabiting was one of those
that applied Modernism to the programs of the reconstruction of Ankara. It was
stated in an official document of this Ministry that:
The Council of Ministers agreed upon the fact that the main urgent issue of the Republic is to have a center of government that has all means of civilization. The possibility of the program and the points which has been discussed through our goals on Ankara is presented below. We have to immediately decide the future general plan in order to begin these works in the beginning of 1340 [1924] fiscal year. (appendix 1)
This report on the general situation of Ankara in 1924 is an important source for our
study as it includes the early thoughts of the state about transforming the ‘poor, rural’
town to a ‘modern capital city’ immediately afterwards the declaration of the ‘New
Regime’. According to the same document, there were ten articles explaining the
problems of the capital city and proposals for their solutions:
1. The law of Ankara Municipality is almost ready at the Ministry of Internal Affairs. We can finish these studies until January. The head-engineer of the Municipality will assign a foreign engineer, who is an
73 Sibel Bozdoğan, “Introduction: Modernism on the Margins of Europe,” 2001, Modernism and Nation Building:Turkish Architectural Culture in the Early Republic, (Seattle and London: University of Washington Press), p. 6. 74 Bozdoğan, p. 5. 75 Bozdoğan, p. 6.
24
expert for the arrangement and construction of new cities, in the body of Ankara Municipality. It is thought that this expert’s fee may be paid by the government’s budget of foreign experts.
2. The Plan of Ankara is being prepared by a committee with the presidency of the Minister of Public Works, Muhtar Beyefendi. This plan includes the urgent works of infrastructure and construction and will be ready in the beginning of January. The old plan will be completed by an enterprising firm, Keşfiyat Company, until May. It has already been ready for the Municipality’s approval. We are asking the Ministry of Internal Affairs for concluding these procedures until the beginning of January.
3. Sewage System: It is certain that the design of the Sewage System of Ankara is going to be applied to the general plan of the city by the Keşfiyat Company. The sewage system is going to be constructed directly by the Municipality.
4. The Provision and Distribution of Water: The Ministry of Foundations has been enterprising for the arrangement of the water requirement of Ankara. This attempt is interrelated with the organization of the Municipality. Apart from that, the financial conduct of the Ministry of Foundations about the Tepebaşı Bahçesi district of Istanbul will be a decisive factor in realizing this attempt. We are asking the Ministry of Internal Affairs for concluding this formality until the beginning of January.
5. The Electricity: The general lighting of the city is necessary and urgent for a civilized life. It is definitely wished to activate the electricity enterprises in March. Therefore, it must be searched for a foreign firm in order to provide electricity to the entire city in a modern and contemporary way. Without disturbing this principle, the deeds of the Ministry of Internal Affairs have to be brought to a conclusion. We are especially asking the Cabinet for concluding these points in hastiness.
6. The Dwellings and the Buildings: We have to start the construction of dwellings in the beginning of March of 1340 [1924]. (…)
7. The Streets: Actually the expenses for the construction of streets, that needs much money, belong to the Municipality. However, it is a necessity to construct at least one or two roads for determining the structure of the city as soon as possible with minimum efforts in 1340 [1924]. In addition, the expenses for the construction of roads to distant places like Keçiören and Çankaya must be obtained from the budget of Ministry of Public Works. We are asking for the proposals of the Ministry of Public Works urgently.
8. The Transportation Vehicles: The Minister of Public Works will try to provide a tram system in Ankara. The connection of distant places by bus is an urgent issue which has to be concluded until March. We are asking the Ministry of Public Works and the Ministry of Internal Affairs to give their proposals and initiate their works.
25
9. The Telephone: We reach to a decision that the General Directorate of Telegraph and Telephone is going to procure the requirements of telephone for the time being. (…)
10. An amount of 600 000 TL have to be lent to the Ankara Municipality from the budget of 1340 (1924) with a temperate interest rate. (appendix 2)
According to this document, it should be suggested that the technical disabilities of
Turkey caused to take Western countries as a model after the Independence. The
construction process needed both the technical and financial supports which were
interrelated with foreign nations. The document expresses that French, Italian and
Sweden companies had attempted the construction of buildings in Ankara. There
were also some Turkish enterprising groups such as Reşid Apaz, competed with the
foreign ones. The Ministry of Finance and The Ministry of Foundations evaluated the
proposals carefully and noticed that “(…) foreigners will probably insist on to lend
money in their monetary unit because of their financial policy of increasing their
money’s exchange value. (…) So, it is an urgent issue for The Ministry of Finance
and The Ministry of Foundations to mediate the government in order to decide a
financial principle.”
Another document that expresses the significance of the decisions of politicians in
the creation of a new capital city is the letter of the Minister of Education to the
Prime Ministry on the 8th of March in 1925. The government agencies announced the
decisions for the construction of new ministry buildings and the ones constructed by
the Municipality at several publications in those days. The subject of the letter of the
Minister of Education was the architectural manner of these governmental buildings
and the ones that would be built by the Municipality in the capital city. The Minister
of Education noticed that, if these new buildings were in free and irregular forms we
would not have a beautiful panorama in the capital city. Therefore, the architectural
styles have to be matched with the Turkish nation’s taste and constitute a Grand
National spectacle. He offered that the Department of Culture should examine each
new project of the Ministries and the Municipality through the perspective of Turkish
culture before their full exercises. (appendix 3)
The Prime Minister approved the proposal and wrote a memo to all ministries.
(appendix 4) The Minister of Public Works answered the letter of the Prime Minister
on the19th of March in 1925. He wrote that:
26
The projects under the responsibility of the Ministry of Public Works are being designed by the engineers graduated from Mühendis Mektebi [The School of Engineers]. The teachers of Mühendis Mektebi are giving lectures to both students of Sanay-i Nefise and Mühendis Mektebi, concerning national ornamentation aspects and national culture. In this respect, it is not a necessity to send the projects of the official buildings designed by the engineers of the Public Works and Construction Department to the Department of Culture. (appendix 5)
According to these documents, it should be confirmed that the architecture of the
Early Republican Period was an important agent for the politicians to realize the
nationalistic ideals. For Bozdoğan, “During this period [1908-1950], style was not
autonomous aesthetic realm or simply a technical matter internal to the discipline of
architecture. It was a powerful vehicle through which political leaders and
professional architects sought to imagine the nation where it did not exist.”76 The
construction of the monuments was one of the outcomes of this fact.
The political leaders had decided the construction of the victory monuments of
Ankara before the declaration of the Republic and new capital city. They were
considered as significant architectural representations of the nationally constituted
program of the expected Republican regime and had been closely related with the
ideals of the Turkish nation.
The Second President of the Assembly and the General President of the Council of
Victory Monuments wrote a letter to Adnan Beyefendi [Adıvar] from İstanbul in
1923. He expressed the “expectation from him to constitute a committee that would
become organized at Istanbul for the victory monuments of Ankara”. (appendix 6) It
was stated in this letter that the members of the committee should be constituted by
some of the artists and literary men of İstanbul who would arouse interest on the
victory monuments of the new capital city by press. (fig. 3.1)
According to this document it should be suggested that the shaping of the built
environment of the capital city was also considered as a part of memory and history
construction process. Therefore the construction of buildings and spaces contributed
to the formation of collective representations. The symbols, rituals, spatial activities
and ‘bodily practices’77 were related with specific spaces to support the
76 Bozdoğan, p. 294. 77 Paul Connerton, 1992, How Societies Remember ( Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press).
27
transformations in the living patterns of Turkish society and the creation of the
Turkish civilization. In that sense, Jeffrey O. Click states: “Scholars and politicians
alike have recognized the fundamental connection between memory and nation since
the nineteenth century. Memory and the nation have a peculiar synergy and uniquely
powerful forms of memory were generated in the crucible of the nation-state.”78
Fig. 3.1 The Arch of Victory in front of the Turkish National Assembly Building, Source: Ankara Posta Kartları ve Belge Fotoğrafları Arşivi Kataloğu.
Apart from victory monuments, the construction of the sport areas, parks and
recreation places was an attempt for inculcating the ideals of the new government.
The print media completely supported the government to guide the society according
to ‘youth and health’ ideals of the state during the Republican period. The authors
were working as agents of the new regime’s principles. The Western discourse on
modern and civilized society was effective on themes of articles published in national
magazines and newspapers. Selim Sırrı‘s [Tarcan] essay about the organization of
78 Jeffrey O. Click, ed., 2003, “Introduction,” States of Memory: Continuities, Conflicts, and Transformations in National Retrospection, (Durham and London: Duke University Press), pp. 2-1.
28
Italian society was published in Ülkü in 1933. Tarcan expressed Fascist Italians’
living patterns, national consciousness, free time activities, and hygienic
environments.79 Furthermore, Rahmi Apak, in an essay on the new missions of
Turkish national sport, pointed out the German leader Hitler’s words: “If the leaders
of a nation are only contended with the development of thought but not the
development of body, they will cause both the degeneration of the race and principles
of the administers.”80 Apak attributed this quotation to “despotism times” and
statesmen of the Monarch to present the difference between the new and old regime.
In an article, İnci Aslanoğlu states: “During the 1930s, the Turkish State, like many
of the contemporary western nations gave priority to sports activities for raising a
healthy youth. Turkey’s participation to the 1936 World Olympics in Germany and
the sports centers in major cities were such representations of this policy.”81 Before
the 1930s Turkey attended the 1924 and 1928 Olympics. (fig.3.2) In 1924, Selim
Sırrı was in the committee of French International Olympics as “the representative of
Turkey from Constantinople”.82 Moreover, in 1928, the telegraph of Burhaneddin
Bey to the Prime Minister İsmet Pasha explained the sportsmen’s national
consciousness of being the symbol of Turkish nation in an international sport
activity. He stated: “We are attending to international plays with our trust on God’s
favor and elder people’s tolerance. Our mission is very important and serious,
therefore we need your generous prays and wishes.” (appendix 7)
This intellectual and performative ambiance of the period caused the need for
professional sports areas. The construction of the Hippodrome and Stadium of
Ankara was the first exercise of the Turkish Republic that announced the importance
of bodily performances in national and inter-national milieu. It was designed by
Paulo Vietti-Violi between 1934 and 1936. Apak points out, “It became a model for
three other stadiums of İstanbul and for those in other cities. All these sport facilities 79 Selim Sırrı [Tarcan], Nisan 1933, “ İtalya’da Halk ve Gençlik Teşkilatı,” Ülkü Cilt 3 (1), pp. 243-241. 80 Rahmi Apak, İkinci Kanun [Ocak] 1936, “Türk Sporunun Yeni Hükümleri,” Ülkü Vol , p. 346. 81 İnci Aslanoğlu, “Two Italian Architects: Gulio Mongeri and Paulo Vietti Violi During the Periods of First Nationalism and Early Modernism in Ankara,” 1995, Atti del Convegno: Architettura e architetti italiani ad Istanbul tra il XIX e il XX secolo (Istituto Italiano Di Cultura Di İstanbul), p. 18. 82 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 20.02.1924, Unpublished Official Document, no:03010/144.34.3/148.
29
scatleveled all around towns and villages, reached to one hundred fifty in number
until 1936.” 83 He goes on to state that the meaning of the national extensively used
sport and caused some of the inventions of new national sport types besides the
traditional ones. In addition to the idea of creating a hygienic society, these facilities
had an important role in the national calendar. On national festive days, these spaces
became the sites of commemoration where the ritualistic events took place and “the
political dimension of ‘social memory’ was experienced.”84
Fig. 3.2 Program of the 1924 Olympics at Paris. Source: General Directorate of Government Archives.
83 Apak, pp. 347-346. 84 Connerton, p.1. He states that national festivals are ones that made these unique forms of ‘social memory’ as another dimension of political power.
30
The Hippodrome is a particular site which can be defined as a place that is “socially
and ideologically demarcated and separated from other places.”85 In this respect, our
study on national festivals at the Hippodrome attempts to expose the spatial, political
and social organizations in the horse race site for creating a social memory through
national festivals during the Early Republican period. The documents in the archives
expressed that the ideological and political decisions behind the construction of the
Hippodrome of Ankara were not only limited with constructing a site for horse races.
It was also for the ‘invented’ national festivals which were taking place at this site
and make the ‘imagined nation’ legitimate and survive.
3.1.1 The Hippodrome and the Lörcher Plan
The first development plan of Ankara was designed by Dr. Carl Christoph Lörcher.
Keşfiyat ve İnşa’at Türk Anonim Şirketi [Turkish Estimating and Construction
Incorporated Firm], where Mr. Lörcher was working as an expert was asked to
develop a plan. The results of initial studies were completed on the 30th of May in
1924 and presented to Şehremaneti (Municipality) with a report.86 According to Ali
Cengizkan, this report, as Ankara’s first plan, developed a base for taking main
decisions on planning of the modern capital city. The Lörcher Plan put forward a
systematic way for designing green and open places in the city. Some of the initial
principles were further developed by Jansen in 1928 and 1932 plans.87 Consequently,
the Lörcher Plan is important for our study to find the clues for the development of
Hippodrome’s early stages in Ankara.
85 Hilda Kuper, “The Language of Sites in the Politics of Space,” in Setha M.Low, Denise Lawrence-Zuniga (ed.), 2003, The Anthropology of Space and Place: Locating Culture, ( UK: Blackwell Publishing), p. 258. 86 Ali Cengizkan, 2003, Ankara 1924 Lörcher Planı Raporu, (Ankara:Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi), p. 153. 87 Cengizkan, pp. 158-154.
31
Fig. 3.3 A part of Lörcher Plan showing the Hippodrome, Stadium, Festival Place and the roads. Source: A. Cengizkan, 2003, Ankara 1924 Lörcher Planı Raporu, (Ankara: TTK Basımevi)
32
Lörcher emphasized Ankara’s urban esthetics and thus designed structural and
functional zones in order to create a modern city. Especially, the section “Free
Squares” was a typical reflection of the idea of ‘hygiene’ in urban context. He
proposed squares, recreational spaces, sport areas, and parks for this purpose.
Western countries had problems on realizing free squares because they had not
planned the cities in this respect. Ankara, on the other hand, had more chance to
create such open places as they were designed in the beginning.88
Considering the plan of Lörcher, we notice that he designed a stadium and
hippodrome at the north west of Ankara. It was not the same location as later
proposed by Jansen. A fair and exhibition site was planned at the south of stadium
and they were integrated together by a road. It is stated in the report that this road
would have been used for parades and national plays.89 The present locations of both
the Stadium and half of the Hippodrome were subdivided into smaller units and
planned as dwelling areas, while the other part of the present Hippodrome field was
designed as ‘Festsspielplatz’ (Festival Celebration Square). This festival space, the
fair-exhibition field, park and stadium were connected to each other by roads and
created a sort of social spaces for citizens. (fig.3.3)
3.1.3 The Horse Race Site Before the Construction of Hippodrome
“Horse races are necessary for modern societies”90 was one of Atatürk’s sayings
expressing the significance of horse races in modern Turkey. Reşat Köstem states
that horse races were organized at 1600 meters runway near the Ankara Station by
Atatürk’s special order in 1920 and he adds that the race site was designed to
incorporate the stands, ticket offices and other units. We understand from a program
document with the title ‘Gazi Mustafa Kemal Paşa Hazretlerinin himaye-i
fahimanelerinde Ankara’da icra edilecek Sonbahar At Koşuları’ that these races
were continued after 1922 because Mustafa Kemal named the nickname “Gazi” after
88 Cengizkan, p. 158. 89 Cengizkan, p. 188. 90 Reşat Köstem, “Ankara Yarışları,” 2000, Tarihsel Sürecinde Atçılığımızın Yapısı ve Yarışçılığımızın Oluşumu ( Türkiye Jokey Kulübü Yayınları), p. 74.
33
the 30th August 1922.”91 These races were organized not for gambling, but for a
festive practice that gathered people and reassured the society during war years.
Fig. 3.4 M. Kemal Atatürk is watching the horse races organized by Himaye- i Etfal Kurumu at Ankara Horse Race Site, 11.11.1921. Source: The Publications of the Ministry of Culture.
These photographs above were taken on the 11th of November, in 1921 at the
hippodrome of Ankara. (fig. 3.4) It is seen that the Race Site was decorated with
symbols with flags, flowers, etc. and Atatürk was dressed his jockey clothes. It
should be suggested that this mode of dressing was a representation of the state’s
support on social activities. These meetings with people developed the relations
between the state and citizens. His comrades, İsmet Pasha, Fevzi Çakmak and Refet
Bele, were also at the Race Site. This sport activity was ‘invented’ to gather ‘people’
for ‘national solidarity’. The sentence written in Arabic Alphabet on the belt of little
girl’s chest means that the horse race was organized to help orphan children. The
91 Köstem, p.73.
34
horse races were an example of “selective traditions”, characterized by certain
meanings and practices which were chosen for emphasis and reinterpretation.92
Furthermore, a letter written by the Minister of Internal Affairs to the Prime Ministry
on the 14th of June, 1341 (1925) expressed that a horse race was organized on behalf
of Teyyare Cemiyeti (Plane Association) and Ministry of Agriculture had given 2000
TL for the expenses of this race. The Minister requested the Prime Ministry to
approve the addition of this money to the Plane Association’s budget. (appendix 8)
In 1927, The Race and Amelioration Council was established to structure modern
horse activities with the support of the Turkish state. (fig. 3.5) The first ‘Gazi Race’
was arranged at the Race Site of Ankara on the 10th June, 1927. Even though the 10th
June was the first day of religious Muslim Festival of Sacrifices, the people showed a
great interest to races. 93 Sait Akson, in his memory book, wrote:
The horses came from Istanbul and were welcomed with a ceremony at Ankara Train Station (…). The race was organized at the old Hippodrome. It was behind the İmalatı Harbiye building (The building of Makina Kimya Enstitüsü is still there.) where the soldiers of Presidential Guard exercised. Besides, it was surrounded with walls of Gazi Muallim Koleji and İmalatı Harbiye buildings which made the 1800 meters length running track narrow. The ground was mostly covered with soft soil, the tribunes and ticket offices were made of timber.94
According to Akson’s study, it should be assumed that the Hippodrome was firstly
invented for horse races which had not only social but national significances. The
state gave importance to this performative process and supported this activity by laws
and institutions. The horses were one of the symbols that signified the nation’s
defense and economy; therefore the ‘Gazi Races’ were becoming a tradition and had
been organized at this site until 1979.95
92 Lyn Spillman, “When do collective memories last?” in Jeffrey K. Olick (ed.), 2003, States of Memory: Continuities, Conflicts, and Transformations in National Retrospection, (Durham and London: Duke University Press), p. 163. 93 Köstem, pp. 111-109. 94 Sait Akson, “ Yarış ve Islâh Encümeni Yarışları,” 1971, Yarışçılık Anıları ( Ankara:Ankara Yarı Açık Cezaevi Matbaası), pp. 34-31. 95 Köstem, p.119.
35
Fig. 3.5 Wooden seating stands used before the construction of Hippodrome (after 1925). Source: Bir Zamanlar Ankara
The letter of the President of the Presidency of the General Staff, Reşit Bey, to the
Prime Ministry proves that there existed an idea of a ‘hippodrome and stadium
complex” at their present location in Ankara even at the early years. On the 19th
March 1927, the Director pointed out that:
It is known that the construction of a sport field is being leveled at the paddock between the Train Station and Evkaf district by the Association of Military Aid and Ankara Municipality. However, these enterprises for ‘a simple sports field at Ankara’ will not cover the need of the capital city. First of all, Ankara has to be the center of sports and body training of Turkey so a grand stadium and its modern institutions have to be constructed at the central part of Ankara. This site is the place of the “Park” as far as I informed by authorized experts. The Ministry of National Education allocated an amount of 70.000 TL for body training school at Cebeci from their 1927 budget. The Ministry of National Defense allocated an amount of 70.000 TL for Army Sport organizations and material support. They want to spend 30.000 TL of this budget for sport tool requirements of army and they think of constructing a military sport school or sport hall with the remaining 40.000 TL. Furthermore, Ankara Municipality allocated an amount of 5.000 TL from 1926 remaining budget and 70.000 TL which will be spent in ten years time for constructing a stadium. If these amounts are not gathered in one account for the same purpose, it is evident that not only the results could not be completed but also the perfect project could
36
not be realized. In addition, it will be a disadvantage for people to construct such a sport complex with its fields and school at Cebeci because of transportation problems. Instead of Cebeci, this project has to be built in Ankara Park where every young people can easily reach everyday. Moreover, the trees and flower beds of the park related with the Stadium will be a good beginning (door) at the Station side of Ankara. These institutions joining according to the plan along the east side of Ankara-Station Road will be suitable to represent our state and nation’s permanent power and ideals to our society and foreign nations.(…) (appendix 9)
The Race Site of Ankara had been a particular place before the construction of the
Hippodrome and had given opportunities for social relations between different
classes. The documents show that the site created a circumstance for national unity
and solidarity during horse races, especially the races of donation. Meanwhile,
horses carried some national meanings and symbolized the modernized Turkey in
foreign countries because their strength and success in international sport facilities
represented the image of the nation and defense forces of the nation that they
belonged to. For this reason, Atatürk gave the names ‘Çankaya and Sakarya’ 96 to his
two successful horses which signified two important locations of the National
Independence War. On the whole, it should be suggested that the horse races were
used both as a tool for social cohesion and as a representation of modern Turkey’s
visions.
3.1.4 The Jansen Plan and the Enterprises for the First Celebrations
at Hippodrome
Even though the Lörcher Plan was not completely put into practice, it marked new
epochs to the politicians and the planners of Ankara. First of all, they realized the
necessity of a development plan to guide the construction of the capital city in time.
Therefore, Prof. Dr.-İng J. Brix and Prof. Dr. h. c. Hermann Jansen from Berlin and
Leon Jausseley from France were invited to the competition of the Development Plan
of Ankara in 1927. 97 They presented the projects and their reports to the jury
members in 1929. Afterwards the Minister of Internal Affairs Şükrü Kaya presented
96 Cem Atabeyoğlu, “Atatürk ve Atçılık,” 1981, Atatürk ve Spor (Hisarbank Kültür Yayınları), pp. 35-31. 97 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 09.03.1929, Unpublished Official Document, no:030.10./122.867.2/101-24; Fehmi Yavuz, “ Ankara İmar Planı Avan Proje Müsabakası, ” 1952, Ankara’nın İmarı ve Şehirciliğimiz (Ankara: Güney Matbaacılık ve Gazeticilik T.A.O.), p. 26.
37
all the reports to the Prime Ministry on the 9th March, 1929.98 Atatürk approved the
decision of the jury members and the Jansen’s project was chosen as the
development plan of Ankara. Tankut states that the period began with these
competitions to 1939 were the most interesting times of the Republican history
because the capital city experienced the first and the most evident stage of
development.99
In the preface of his report, Jansen emphasized that the form of the center of a
government is a symbol of its nation’s emotions and thoughts. Therefore, it was
necessary to create the capital city clearly in respect of a development plan.
According to him, there were a few countries which had capital cities as favorable as
Ankara for applying a development plan to the whole city from the beginning.
Furthermore, Jansen especially dwelled upon the significance of the historical citadel
of Ankara. He pointed out that whether political or social, the Ankara Castle had to
be the center of the city and all other parts of the city had to be oriented not to
destroy its centrality. Consequently, Turkey would be one of the nations that would
be appreciated for her existing monuments like the Capitol of Rome and Kasır
(Acropolis) of Pergamon. (appendix 10)
After Jansen had presented the fundamental issues of Ankara Plan, he explained his
project in details. In the chapter of Stadium and Horse Race Site he noted that, the
Hippodrome and the Youth Park were designed nearby Ankara Train Station to
create a green and free panorama together with the castle for the visitors coming to
the station. (fig. 3.6) Jansen stated that:
The area offered by the Municipality for the Stadium and the Horse Race Site is appropriate to this purpose because of its swampy ground. Moreover, it will be easy to construct transportation roads and the pedestrian ways around these spaces. Stadium is designed in the Horse Race Site like the one in Berlin. In addition to Stadium, some
98Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 09.03.1929, Unpublished Official Document, no:030.10./122.867.2/101-24. Original text is as:
Dahiliye Vekâleti, Umuru Mahalliye, Sayı 1893/2 [Antet] Başvekâlet-i Celileye, Mutahassıslar tarafından gönderilen Ankara Şehri planlarına ait izahnameler leffen arz ve takdim kılınmıştır efendim. Dahiliye Vekili Ş.Kaya (imza) 99 Tankut, p.2.
38
institutions like Physical Training School, Military Sport School and training courses have to be built. Above all, the infrastructure of the Stadium and the Horse Race Site has been especially designed in the project. (appendix 11)
Fig. 3.6 The perspective of Jansen for Stadium and Parade Field, 05.03.1934. Source: Ankara İmar Planı, 1937.
The law number 1351 about the foundation of the Directorate of Public
Improvements determined that Jansen took over the authority of the Directorate in
designing zoning and construction plan of Ankara. Certainly, If Jansen did not give
permission; the Directorate of Public Improvements could not change the
Development Plan of Ankara.100 Therefore, the government wrote a letter to Jansen
about the difficulties of the Race and the Stadium Field and needed a new proposal
project on the 1st of February 1930. (fig 3.7) Jansen explained his new project to
Ankara Directorate of Public Improvements with the letter of February 14th. He
explained the revisions of his project as:
100 Tankut, p. 83.
39
1. The Race Site does not transgress the field of Ankara Municipality at the northwest side.
2. My new proposal of project meets with Bentderesi (stream) on the Northeast side. But, I could not suggest any idea of how long stream route will be changed because of my insufficient information. However, I suppose this is not an important problem for you as well, because the Stadium was shown on the same place in your second petition of 28th of January, 1930 that you sent to me.
3. The canal separated from Bentderesi (stream) does not transgress the new project site. I could design the Race Site through your request of getting closer with the Train Station, but it is necessary to build the roads that are shown in my new proposal between the Station, Istanbul and Military Cartridge Factory for this purpose.
I do not approve the road previously designed between the Race Site and the Stadium in the new project. Actually, this road will not be worth spending money. Instead of that road, we have planned the ones between the Race Site and the Station and they will be useful for the Industrial Zone. [The roads signed with the letters A, C, G]
Beside the underpasses signed with CD and EF [these underpasses are connecting the roads parallel to railway], it can be decided only after the site observation that whether or not it is needed to build the one more underpass signed with AB. The FBD road stays at the same location shown in the Competition Project.
The area signed with D is far away from dwellings; therefore it is suitable for Salhane [slaughterhouse]. (appendix 12)
Some buildings were drawn on the plan by freehand to show the existing nature of
the construction area in 1930. (fig. 3.7) According to the notes on the drawings it
should be suggested that there were a tile factory, a garage, woodwork factory, some
dwellings that belonged to these factories, slaughter houses, a leather drying area, a
cleaning area, an intestine-house [bagirsahhane] in the Stadium and Hippodrome site
in 1930. The document dated 26th January, 1931, proves the presence of a tile factory
at Akköprü. It states that “The tile factory located at Akköprü has had the exemption
license of Stimulation of Industries [Teşvikisanayi] since the 3rd of September, 1927.”
(appendix 13)
40
Fig. 3.7 The Jansen’s Plan no 2600: Ankara, The Race Site and The Stadium, 08.02.1930. Source: The General Directorate of Government Archives.
41
Apart from Jansen, the governor Nevzat [Tandoğan] was a significant actor in the
construction of Ankara and also the Hippodrome. He stated to work as the Mayor
with respect to the law number 1580101 and was influential in Ankara’s construction
during Early Republican period. His letter of February 15th, 1930 about the
celebrations of the foundation of the Republic should be suggested as an important
step for the beginning of national festivals commemorated at the Hippodrome. He
wrote to the Race and Amelioration Council:
It is obvious that the arrangement of the Horse Race Site is going to start soon. The Municipality constructs temporary tribunes for statesmen, deputies, officials and their families on the road in front of the Grand National Assembly on every Republican Festival day. The state determined to pay an amount of 30.000 Turkish Liras to province budget for building more comfortable tribunes because of the Municipality’s financial difficulties. Moreover, a lot of money was spent for the Animal Exhibitions that were organized in ordinary sheds every year. The governorship has received an amount of 10.000 TL for the betterment of organization of this year’s exhibition. Unfortunately, most of the citizens cannot involve in celebrations because of the disadvantages of the festival site in front of the National Assembly. It is thought that the Horse Race Site has the capacity for realizing a well-organized official parade which will be watched easily by every citizen. (appendix 14)
Robert Oerley had been one of the foreign technicians of the Directorate of Ankara
Public Improvements since 1929. He was having good relations with Hermann
Jansen during the planning and the construction period of Ankara and helped him
and acting like his representative in Turkey.102 He organized the correspondences,
drawings, and reports for Jansen and the Directorate of Public Improvements. Oerley
wrote an important letter dated 25.02.1930 to the Directorate about the Jansen’s Plan
with the number 2600 about the Stadium and the Race Site. He stated that Jansen’s
plan which was showing the location of Stadium and slaughterhouses was received
on the 20th of February 1930. He added that this plan was a product of the
101 Fehmi Yavuz, “Ankara Belediyesinin Şehremanetine Çevrilmesi,” 1952, Ankara’nın İmarı ve Şehirciliğimiz, (Ankara:Güney Matbaacılık ve Gazetecilik), p. 15. Fehmi Yavuz states that the Ankara Municipality was established on the 16th of February, 1924 with the law number 417. According to this law, Ankara would have a mayor who would be appointed by the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The municipality law with the number 1580 broke the protocol for electing the mayor of Ankara and approved the two alternatives:
1. Mayor would work only for the Municipality services. 2. The Governor of Ankara could be the Mayor at the same time.
102 Tankut, pp. 78-75.
42
discussions between the Directorate of Public Improvements and Jansen. Oerley
pointed out:
…It is understood that the construction of the Hippodrome is not only a necessity for Ankara’s development but also its application near the Stadium will expose satisfaction and useful experience to the city. The regular parade that has been taken place in front of the National Assembly every year is not going to go to take place at the same site again because of the slope of the road. From now on the parade can be organized at the Horse Race Site. Furthermore, by constructing permanent tribunes on the Horse Race Site, we will recoup the financial loss caused by assembling and disassembling the temporary tribunes only for one day. (appendix 15)
After presenting the advantages of constructing the Hippodrome according to his
plan Jansen asked for the approval of the new plan and a decision about opening a
tender for the Hippodrome and roads to finish the construction on time.
Then, the letters of Prof. Jansen and his drawings about the Stadium and the
Hippodrome reached to the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The Minister Şükrü Kaya
examined the plans and decided that the Race Site would be useful for the parade for
the celebrations of the foundation of Republic. Due to his position and the laws of the
Directorate of Development he wrote a letter to the Prime Ministry dated 25.02.1930
about the urgency of the approval of the Jansen’s Plan of the Hippodrome and the
Stadium in the Council of Ministers. (appendix 16)
The written decree, number 8922, was signed by Gazi M. Kemal and the Ministers
one day after. This decision put an end in accepting Jansen’s plans about the Stadium
and the Race Site and performing national parades at the Hippodrome. (appendix 17)
It was also signed a beginning for the preparations in constructing a new
Hippodrome with ‘invented’ national ceremonies.
Jansen finished the final General Development Plan of Ankara in 1932. It was
presented for the approval of the Cabinet with the memorandum number 578/80
dated 4th July, 1932 by the Internal Affairs Ministry. There were two maps in a scale
of 1:4000. The cabinet approved the plans due to the second article of law number
1351. (appendix 18)
When we examine Jansen’s zoning and construction plans for Ankara dated May
1932 (scaled 1:12500) and June 1932 (scaled 1:4000) we notice some revisions at the
43
Hippodrome and Stadium. (fig.3.8) The location of stadium moved a little bit to the
north, the routes of the streams were changed; one of the underpasses (AB) which
was had been designed to join the road at the south of Hippodrome with the road at
the south of train station was removed.
Fig. 3.8 A part of Jansen Plan showing the Hippodrome, 1932. Source: The General Directorate of Government Archives.
Although Jansen was identified as the main authority for the construction of the
capital city, he was suspicious about the impacts of the architectural projects of
official buildings on the General Plan of Ankara. On the 4th of August 1933, Jansen
wrote a letter to the Prime Minister to tell his concerns on the ministry buildings and
the Exhibition House’s application and asked for the construction programs and
informing him about the developments and changes in the city. (appendix 19) Tankut
points out that, “although there was a centralist development management and
somehow a construction through conservations of the state, the architectural
44
expressions were so liberal during the proper application period of Ankara’s
Development Plan.”103 When we overview the construction principles of the
Hippodrome according to these developments, it should be suggested that the
development of this site was also under the strict control of the government. Besides,
these controls maintained the application of Jansen’s general rules for the
Hippodrome and the Stadium except some minor changes on the surrounding roads.
3.1.5 The Situation of the Site Before the Competition
The politicians and the officials of the Turkish Republic had noticed the importance
of architecture for nation-construction process, since the 1920s. The archival
documents prove the efforts of politicians on conveying meanings and constituting
collective consciousness by controlling the built-environment. Their experiences on
national festivals between 1923 and 1930 formed a base for using the power of space
for social and political construction of the nation. In 1930s, they materialized the
regularity of national festival spaces by constructing the Hippodrome which would
be called as the ‘Republican Square of Ankara’. This space was a kind of a “spatial
tool which calls for the use of space as a strategy and/or technique for power and
social control.”104 The transformation of the Horse Race Site into a ‘place of national
festivals’ was a result of the studies of politicians on constructing not only the capital
city but rather the social and historical relations between society, politics and the
space. Moreover, it was an expression of how national meanings are embedded in a
place and how that place holds the memories of people.
Firstly, The Horse Race Site had to be arranged and designed for the new purposes.
There were some technical and financial problems met with before its construction. It
was the time of a big economic crisis all over the world and that eventually affected
Turkey which was certainly in the process of constructing a young nation-state for
some time.105 The Turkish Republic balanced the economy by lessening the
expenses. Therefore the budget allocated for the building facilities of Ankara and
also for the Hippodrome had to be limited. Most of the problems of the Hippodrome 103 Tankut, p. 94. 104 Setha M. Low and Denise Lawrence- Zuniga, “Locating Culture,” in Setha M. Low and Denise Lawrence- Zuniga (ed.), 2003, The Anthropology of Space and Place (Blackwell Publishing), p. 30. 105 Tankut, p.100.
45
emerged from this crisis and the government made considerable efforts not to delay
the completion of the project.
The construction began with the betterment of the swampy ground of the area. As
there was not any technical equipment, the operations could only begin by using
human force. The Governor Nevzat offered to use the coups of the Engineer
Battalion in leveling the Race Site’s ground for he was conscious in minimizing the
expenses. He, in his letter to the Race and Improvement Council, dated February
24th, 1930, pointed out that, “We should have an economy of nearly 40.000-50.000
TL by using the soldiers and an engineer who was appointed as a chief by the
National Defense Ministry.” (appendix 20) Then, the letter of the Prime Ministry to
the National Defense Ministry on the 16th of March, 1930 expressed that they
approved the Governor’s proposal about using army personnel to speed up the
process. (appendix 21)
The Governor Tandoğan was the main responsible person for the construction. His
letter to the Race and Amelioration Council dated 27.04.1930 proved that he insisted
on the emergency of leveling the site because Jansen’s project was ready and yet
there were further works before the national festival day. He pointed out, “Though
we do not start to construct the Race Site this year, we have to begin setting the
boundaries of the area. If we define the area we can easily level the ground which
does not need any money.” (appendix 22)
Finally, the Prime Minister İsmet İnönü Paşa approved Mr. Tandoğan’s requests and
gave the Governorship permission to encircle the race site on the 4th of May, 1930.
According to this document, the Governorship would finance the leveling and the
encircling of the area with its own budget. (appendix 23)
Before the leveling started, the Prime Ministry had asked the Technical Works
Department of the Public Improvements Directorship for the designs and drawings of
the Race Site. After a period of time the Undersecretary of the Prime Ministry
reminded Internal Affairs Ministry the necessity of the projects by a letter of June
11th, 1930 and ordered detailed information about the stage of current works of the
department. (appendix 24)
While the site was being arranged, the preparations for the construction of spectators’
tribunes began. The Governorship appropriated a fund of 30.000 TL to the Ziraat
46
Bank account of Race and Amelioration Council for building the tribunes. (appendix
25) Five months later, it was understood that the money given to the Race Council
from 1930 Province Budget was not enough and the amount 50.000 TL had to be
added. The Council could not obtain this amount and had to wait for the 1931
Governor Budget to start the construction. Meanwhile, the amount of 30.000 TL had
to be loaned by the help of Ziraat Bank until the year of 1931. Thus, it was certain
that the construction of tribunes would begin by the next summer. (appendix 26)
Apart from these, one of the ideals of this construction period was to create a healthy
nation and hygienic public spaces. Ankara had fought with deadly illnesses caused
by swampy areas of uncontrolled streams.106 Jansen had pointed out the necessity of
changing the beds of the streams in the borders of the Race site in his several letters
of 1930. The orientation and betterment of these streams was one of the difficulties
in the construction period; that is why the Prime Minister wanted ministries of
Health and Social Aiding, and Public Works to present their reports after their
detailed investigation on the riverbeds of Hatip and İncesu Streams on the 18th of
December, 1930.
Fifteen days later, The Minister of Health and Social Aiding reported to the Prime
Ministry that:
The Struggle with Malaria Committee investigated the İncesu and Hatip Streams which flow through the Stadium and the Race Site. Several scattered withering canals exist in the construction site. If we remove them the marsh problem would arise again. İncesu can flow through its present bed but it would be more suitable to transfer the bed of Hatip Stream. We can change its direction from Toygaroğlu Bridge at Akköprü Junction out of the Race Site with a canal. We need your permission to begin the required operations under the responsibility of The Directorate of Water Works. (appendix 27)
Although the Ministry of Health came out with its own report, the Ministry of Public
Works had not presented any report about the streams of the Race Site. The Prime
Ministry wrote a letter about the urgency and seriousness of the results of their
studies on the 24th of March, 1931. (appendix 28) Although it was the 16th of April
the reports had not been presented to the Governor, yet. Tandoğan considered results
of all these investigations important and was anxious about the delay. He presented
the situation to the Prime Ministry by a letter and pointed out that whether the reports
106 Bozkurt, p.759.
47
had not been prepared, the announcement of competition on Race Site and Stadium
would be interrupted.
Fig. 3.9 The Water Field of Ankara Race Site, 06.05.1931. Source: the General Directorate of The Government Achieves
The secretary of the Prime Ministry replied the letter of the Governor two days later
and stated that they had insisted the Ministry of Public Works for the survey of the
site. The Secretary added that the Prime Ministry was informed about the
significance of the reports for the competition. Finally, the copy of the report of the
Directorate of the Water Works was presented by Engineer Abdullah on the 26th
April, 1931. (appendix 29) According to that technical study, calculations were done
due to the plan and section drawings of the present situation of these streams because
48
the capacities of İncesu and Hatip Streams had not been known yet. Moreover, new
retaining walls and canals had to be built. 107 (fig.3.9)
The letter of May 7th, 1931 was sent to the Prime Ministry by the Minister of Public
Works Mr. Hilmi [Uran]. It was expressed in this letter that the temporary projects in
relation with the cleaning up the Hippodrome and Stadium site were presented as a
reply to the letter dated 24th of March 1931. The cost of the operation, changing the
beds of İncesu and Bentderesi Streams towards Akköprü, was nearly 60.000 TL. It
was necessary to make these changes between June and October because the level of
water was low. If the operation was delayed, the level of the water would increase
and the operation would cost much money. (appendix 30)
As the construction of Ankara gained a momentum after the Jansen Development
Plan, the government agencies had to analyze the problems well and organize the
constructions seriously. The technical and financial impossibilities of that period
were overcome by the officials’ extra efforts. Eventually, the technicians and the
scientists of the government had prepared their projects and reports to create a model
complex for sport activities and national commemorative practices of Turkish
society.
3.1.6 The International Competition for the Hippodrome and the
Stadium Projects
3.1.6.1 Preparations
While the official departments were studying on the technical and financial problems
of the race site, the horse races were being organized in difficult conditions. There
was a big interest to this social event but they had not been realized comfortably in
contemporary environments. The government organized international competitions
for some official buildings of Turkey during the 1930s, and the competition of the
107 This project expresses that new retaining walls had to be built for İncesu Stream from 0.000 km to 0.380 km to prevent ant float of Bent Stream. The base level of Bent Stream decreased to -1.000 meter in order to make the water flow through İncesu. 1 meter high walls had to be constructed to transfer the old base into a new base. The area from 2.017 km to 2.416 km in the Race Site would have been filled with soil. In addition, the 850 meters length watering canal was needed to be built in the area.
49
Hippodrome and the Stadium Complex was one of those projects which were firstly
put on the agenda in 1931.
The government undertook the Horse Race Site competition which was supported to
be only for races. The correspondences between the Prime Ministry and the Ankara
Governorship express that the initial format of the competition considered the
architectural necessities for ‘modern’ horse races. The letter of the Governor
Tandoğan to the Prime Ministry dated 17th June, 1931 included the announcement of
the competition. (appendix 31) It was including four main articles. They were as
follows:
1. A Horse Race Site is going to be built on the west side of İstiklal Avenue in Ankara.
2. A competition has been organized for the projects of this site and the government will award the winner an amount of 5000 TL.
3. The competition will finish on the 1st September, 1931.
4. The competitors have to apply to the Governorship to get maps and list of conditions.
The architectural program including 35 articles were also added to this
announcement. The main concept of this program was to present the units that were
going to be constructed for facilitating the horse races. (appendix 32) The proposals
for celebrating the national festivals at the Hippodrome had been taken into
consideration since 1930 however; there was not any article about the celebrations in
this program. It means that the architectural projects of the parade and stadium
complex had been postponed.
The parade for the anniversary of the foundation of the Turkish Republic of the years
1930 and 1931 were celebrated at İstiklal Avenue in front of the Grand Assembly.
The organizations of the festivals were not satisfactory and the statesmen were still
discussing the transfer of the celebration place to the Race Site. The letter dated
October the 4th in 1932, which was sent by the Minister of Internal Affairs Şükrü
Kaya, to the Prime Ministry pointed out the importance of public participation and
performance of a parade on national days. According to the Minister Kaya, The
İstiklal Avenue was not proper for the activities of the program and disturbed both
the participants and the citizens. It would take more time to wait the construction of
the Stadium and the Hippodrome; on the other hand the ground of the Race Site was
50
appropriate for the national parades. Therefore, the Governorship of Ankara offered
to organize 1932 celebrations in that area. (appendix 33)
In addition, the letter of Minister of National Defense to Prime Ministry expressed
that the celebrations of the Republican Festival of 1931 were not performed at
Hippodrome because the Minister of National Defense was asking for using the Race
Site for the landing of fifty planes which would participate the festival. (appendix 34)
The Prime Minister replied the letter on the 13th of October in 1931 and wrote that:
We have decided and informed the Governorship of Ankara that the
Race Site is appropriate for landing the planes which will fly on 29th of
October. However, horse races will be performed the day after
Republican Festival. Therefore, the stakes of the race site have to be re-
nailed after the ceremony. (appendix 35)
According to thesis letters it should be suggested that, the competition which was
going to result on the 1st September, 1931 could not be realized but the leveling
operations of the Race Site ground were partially finished because the quality of the
ground of the Race Site was useful for landing of planes.
The Governorship continued their preparations on the construction of Hippodrome
and the Stadium in 1933. They announced a new international competition. Three
foreign groups intended to prepare the projects and it was asked from these groups to
deliver their projects on the 10th June, 1933. The application would be started
according to one of these projects chosen in accordance with the specifications. The
financial studies of the Government proved that the construction of the Hippodrome
and the Stadium could cost approximately 4.000.000 Turkish Liras. They tried to
solve the financial problems with different incomes. The official certificate of the
Ministry of Internal Affairs dated 25th of May, 1933 reported that they had believed
to find this amount by credit and pay back by annual installments. But, the complex
had to be built as soon as possible so, they decided to construct firstly the parts which
had priority. In this case the construction could be started with the total 1.000.000
Turkish Liras which was received from the state’s budget. Afterwards, the remaining
parts were thought to be built piecemeal. (appendix 36)
On the 29th May, 1933, The Minister of Internal Affairs Kaya asked the Prime
Ministry for the approval of the specifications of the competition which were
51
prepared by the Ankara Governorship. (appendix 37) The President Gazi Mustafa
Kemal and the cabinet affirmed the specifications of competition and main articles of
bidding on the same day. (appendix 38)
The application project of the Hippodrome and the Stadium was going to be selected
in regard to these articles:
1. The Prime Minister or the Council of Ministers will select one of the projects for the Stadium and the Hippodrome of Ankara designed by; S.A. ING. Barosi and Vietti-Violi from Milano, Deutsche Landeskulturbau Gesellschaft from Berlin, Davit Janos es fia from Budapest.
2. The Race Site and the Stadium will be built according to the winner’s project. The owner of the Project will not have any right on the project and of claim because of the applications at the construction site.
3. The Governorship of Ankara will prepare a construction program according to the priorities of the buildings. The construction price of those buildings will not surpass the 1.000.000 Turkish Liras. There will be a tender for the first stage of the construction between the three groups written in the first article.
4. These groups have to have these conditions to join the bidding:
a. To present a temporary guarantee fund with the amount of 75.000 TL or having a credit letter from a National Bank.
b. To present a guarantee letter of a National Bank proving that they are capable of constructing the project.
c. To present a certificate of local Turkish Consulate proving that they had built a Hippodrome and a Stadium before.
5. The winner have to prepare the documents listed below in one and half months time:
a. The Estimate of Quantities and Costs
b. The Technical Specifications
c. The Built-up Rules
d. The General Specifications
e. The List of Unit Area and Price.
f. The Required Plans and Sections
6. 5000 TL will be paid to the winner for the projects and documents written in article 5.
52
7. If one of these groups succeeds in both competition and tendering, the prize written in article 6 will be reckon in an account of first ration.
8. The Governorship has rights to change the documents and the projects.108
The bidding document about the Hippodrome and the Stadium stated that the
competition would finish in June, 1933, and a committee selected by the Council of
Ministers would select the winner. The prize of 3.500 TL would be given to first
group and 1.500 TL to second one. The Turkish groups that wanted to join the
bidding had to perform the articles 4a and 4b. In addition they had to get the
certificate of competency with an expert who had the quality of building a Stadium
and a Race Site. It is not important if the expert is Turkish or foreign. They would
share all the results of construction together. The winning group should be the
supervisor of the construction and the money as far they deserve would be paid. If
they did not want to take part in the construction, the price of preparation of technical
documents would be paid.109
Jury members of the competition were determined by the Governorship and
presented to the Ministry of Internal Affairs. (appendix 39) The Minister of Internal
Affairs asked the Prime Ministry that the Election Council of project could be
gathered by; RPP General Clerk Kütahya Deputy Recep, Erzincan Deputy Safvet,
Erzurum Deputy Aziz, Inspector of Cavalryman Mürsel Pasha, The undersecretary of
the Agriculture Minister Atif, the member of the Race and the Improvement Council
Atıf Bey, the representative of the Planning Directorship İrfan Bey. The President
and the Council of Ministers approved the names with decision number 14525 and
the Director of Public Roads Fehmi Bey was added to this list after the request of the
Minister Şükrü Kaya with decision number 14528 on 08.06.1933. (appendix 40) All
of these decisions were presented to the President of Republic for final approval.
(appendix 41)
On the 10th June, 1933 the German group, Deutsche Landeskulturbau Gesellschaft
informed that they could not attend the competition because they thought that it
would be a restricted tender, but as it was told to them just a couple of days before, it
was only a competition of projects for the time being. They stated in their letter that 108 Attachment of letter dated 29.05.1933 with the title “Ankara Stadyum ve Yarış Yeri Projesinin Seçimine ait Şartname” 109 Attachment of letter dated 29.05.1933 with the title “Ankara Yarış yeri ve Stadyum Projesinin Seçme Şartnamesi ve Münakasaya Ait Ana Hatlar”
53
their preparations were not appropriate for exhibiting at Halkevi [Peoples House] and
there was not any time to finish the projects. Also, they requested to be taken into
consideration if there would be a tender of construction later. They went onto state
that the technical and financial reports were ready, and if it was requested they could
be present these documents. (appendix 42)
3.1.6.2 The Results of the Competition
The members of the Council gathered for the selection of the winning project on the
11th and 12th June, 1933 at Halkevi in Ankara. The Italian group (Barosi and Vietti-
Violi) and the Hungarian group (David Jones es fia) presented their projects to the
jury members. The Council took into consideration the criteria decided by the law
number 14472, in order to select the best project. They concluded their studies with a
report dated 15.06.1933. (appendix 43) The secretary of the Council summarized the
outcomes of their evaluation in three articles:
1. At first, the jury members examined the projects according to their capacity of functional usages for the capital city. Finally, we agreed on the fact that the design of the projects and technical calculations had been done correctly. It was understood that the instructions for the designs of the projects had been described clearly and gave rise to success of the competitors.
2. Our experts, who are specialized on sports, examined the projects and decided that there were not any technical mistakes.
3. We thought that examining the projects through financial aspects was not our primary mission. Nevertheless, we realized that both projects would cost nearly the same total price. The members did not deal with the price aspect because the bidding and construction of the projects are going to be done on further stages. Moreover, we have a right to change the projects during the construction period.
After the council examined the works in detail for choosing the most suitable and the
functional project for the center of Turkish state they decided to vote for them.
Finally, the Italian project was given the first prize. (fig. 3.10)
54
Fig. 3.10 Vietti-Violi’s Competition Project, 1933. Source: Rassegna Di Architecttura.
While the government was taking decisions about the construction of the specific
buildings, Jansen went on to study on Ankara’s General Development Plan. He wrote
letters to the Ministry of Internal Affairs about his ideas and sent new plans. One of
those revisions referred to the Hippodrome and the Stadium district. According to
this revision plan a road was added to 200 meters west side of the Station Road. This
new road was in the borders of the competition area and divided the complex into
two parts. Jansen’s last revisions on the site did not fit to the Italian Project and
would spoil the overall structure of the Stadium and the Hippodrome. Any change on
the location of the complex would cause problems. Especially these open places
would be isolated from the city and change the city scope. In his report the Secretary
of the Republican People’s Party pointed out that:
We do not approve of this new transportation road because of the problems it brings out. First of all, we will miss the opportunity of creating an entire sport complex in Ankara. Secondly, we will have to change the dimensions of the sports area and restrict them. Above all, this road emerged from Jansen’s experimental researches and will not be serviceable. We are asking the Prime Ministry to construct this road adjacent to the Station Road or dismiss it. (…) Although it is not our mission to put forward an idea about city planning, we dwell upon this subject because of its effects on the competition site. (appendix 44)
The written decree numbered 14609 put an end point to these discussions. The
President Gazi Mustafa Kemal and cabinet approved jury report and decided that
55
“Vietti-Violi and Barosi’s project performs well for not only Ankara’s requirements
but also technical and financial principles” in June 1933. (appendix 45)
3.1.7 The Construction Period
The construction of the Hippodrome and Stadium Complex started in May 1934. The
financial problems were the main issue that shaped the entire program of the building
process. The Ankara Public Works [Nafia] Director Muammer declared that the
realization of the whole project would cost 4.500.000 Turkish Liras. At first this
financial requirement was expected to be met by credit. However, the urgency of the
project directed the officials to mobilize the state budget. They decided to build the
complex partially in 1934 and continue constructing other parts during the following
years.110 Thus, the government could use the constructed parts for social and national
activities, while the remaining parts were being built.
After the selection of Vietti-Violi’s project the government started to expropriate the
lands which were in the borders of the complex site. There was a gas store, a garage,
an old slaughterhouse, several stores, a repair house, housing units for official
cleaners, in the area which were belonging to Municipality. These buildings were
demolished before the construction began.111
The government called for tenders for the first stage of the construction by the
European and Turkish newspapers and journals. The Ankara Governorship Head
Engineering Department accepted all the submissions February 15th to April 16th in
1934.112 The governorship published a manual explaining the technical specifications
and estimates of costs in 1934. It was written in the instructions to tenderers that
“The contract price of the Hippodrome and Stadium was 1.369.782,84 Turkish Liras
and the betterment of İncesu Brook was 368 424 Turkish Liras. These amounts will
be paid by the Ankara Governorship Special Budget and the contract will be signed
by the Ankara Governor on behalf of the Public Works [Nafia] Minister.”113
110 Ankara Vilâyeti Nafia Müdürü Muammer,“Bayındırlık Haberleri: Stadyom ve Hipodrom İnşaatına Ait Rapor,” 1935-36, Nafia İşleri Mecmuası Vol:7-12, pp. 57-56. 111 Ankara Vilâyeti Nafia Müdürü Muammer, pp. 57-56. 112 “Haberler: Stadyum İnşaatı,” 1934, Arkitekt Vol:2, p.65; Ankara Vilâyeti Nafia Müdürü Muammer, “Bayındırlık Haberleri: Stadyom ve Hipodrom İnşaatına Ait Rapor,” 1935-36, Nafia İşleri Mecmuası Vol:7-12, pp. 57. 113 “Müşterek Münakasa Şartnamesi,” 1934, T.C. Ankara Şehri Stadyum, Hipodrom, Spor Merkezi Şartnameleri ve Keşifleri (Ankara: Hakimiyeti Milliye Matbaası)
56
According to this manual the bidders were responsible from following parts of the
Hippodrome and Stadium project:
1. The Sidewalk, Border Walls, Embankment (870 meters through Satiation Road).
2. The Boundary Walls (wire fences and concrete walls)
3. The Tracks (grass, sand and military parade ways).
4. The Internal leveling, arrangements and limitation.
5. The Irrigation installation of tracks.
6. The Olympic Stadium (first class stands and sports field).
7. The Stables and Saddling Boxes.
8. The stands of Military Parades.
9. The Scaling Building.
10. The Arbitrator Shed.
11. The Sewers and Hygienic Installation.
12. The Stand of the President of the Republic.
13. The First Class Stands of the Hippodrome. (appendix 46)
In addition, the betterment of the İncesu Brook included the following works:
1. The Improvement of the parts which are in the construction site and cladding of the surface of the canals.
2. Leveling the site.
3. The Drainage system of the site.
4. A reinforced bridge above the road which ends with Akköprü main road.
5. A dam at İncesu riverbed.
6. Two water reservoirs and wells.114
Three groups had submitted tendering forms to the Governorship. Finally, the
Turkish group was the selected bidder. Their reduction amount of the firm was %
114 Ankara Vilâyeti Nafia Müdürü Muammer, p.58.
57
20.75, so the contract price was taken down to 1.377.528 Turkish Liras.115 It was
stated in the manual that this firm would start the construction fifteen days after
making contract and would finish the first stage of the works in one year. The
Governorship charged a commission to directly control the contractor’s works. The
Commission also prepared monthly reports and presented them to the
Governorship.116
Paolo Vietti-Violi stated that the success of the architect in this project was to
achieve technical complexities and artistic problems at the same time. The area of the
site was 120 hectares and not suitable for constructing the grass fields, the
Hippodrome, the athletics and the sport fields. The level of the water was below 60
centimeters which needed a drainage system. This system was built by 64000 meters
length, concrete and porous terracotta tubes to lessen the water amount and heighten
the quality of land. He went on to state that this progress was controlled by an Italian
firm.117
The military parade track was one of the important parts of the project. It was 40
meters wide and had 30 centimeters slope. After the drainage and blockage of the
track, the road rollers pressed the stones for increasing the resistance of the track way
for parades. The upper cladding of the track was two layered tar useful for heavy
motor traffic.118
The tribunes of the Hippodrome were classified according to the spectators. The
tribune of the President of the Republic had a special design. Its platform was
projected to symbolize its significance. (fig.3.11) The ministers, ambassadors and
members of the parliament had seats near the President. It was a reinforced concrete 115 Ankara Vilâyeti Nafia Müdürü Muammer, p.57.
The Turkish Group, İnşaat İdarei Fenniyeti, corporated with a Greece firm and their experts were German Verne-Mark and Hungarian Davit Yanoş. Other bidders were an Italian firm and a corporation of a Flemenk firm with architect Bedri. 116 “Ankarada İnşa Edilecek Stadyum ve Hipodrom İçin Münakasa Şartnamesi, Umumi ve İdari Şartname,” 1934, T.C. Ankara Şehri Stadyum, Hipodrom, Spor Merkezi Şartnameleri ve Keşifleri (Ankara: Hakimiyeti Milliye Matbaası), p. 5. 117 Paolo Vietti-Violi, 1937, Il Centro Sportivo Di Ankara (Milano: Rassegna Di Architettura), p. 3.
The definition of Irrigation Installation of the site was written in details at manual of Instructions with the title “Sulama Tesisatı.” 118 “Askerî Resmi Geçit Pisti,” 1934, T.C. Ankara Şehri Stadyum, Hipodrom, Spor Merkezi Şartnameleri ve Keşifleri (Ankara: Hakimiyeti Milliye Matbaası)
58
building and specialized with its 12.5 meters cantilever roof. “Terranova” type
plaster was used to cover the facades of the building. The window sills, embossed
designs, bands, upper cornices were constructed by the Ankara stone. The ground
floor of the building included an entrance saloon. Two stairs reached to upstairs that
included entrance halls, two general saloons, a rest room and a central saloon for the
President. The second floor was referred to jockey-club directorship, superintendents
of polices, and clerks.119
Fig. 3.11 The Tribune of the President of Republic, 1937. Source: Rassegna di Architettura.
According to Vietti-Violi’s project and technical specifications, the First Class
Tribunes of the Hippodrome and its 10 meters long cantilever eave had to be
constructed by reinforced concrete. These tribunes served for 3000 people and had a
terrace which had openings to a restaurant, rest rooms, toilets, cloakroom and offices.
However, it was mentioned in an article of Nafia İşleri Mecmuası that there was a
special tribune for the president of Republic and other spectators which would be
used during official parades of celebrations. The concrete structure of these tribunes 119 T.C. Ankara Şehri Stadyum, Hipodrom, Spor Merkezi Şartnameleri ve Keşifleri, 1934.
59
changed with removable iron profiles because it was believed that they would raise
difficulties for watching horse races.
There are some official documents about these nine tribunes that express the
difficulties in maintaining the iron profiles and equipments for the construction.
Some of them had to be imported from foreign countries, especially from Italia.
Furthermore, the financial insufficiency of the country coerced importations.
According to correspondences, it should be suggested that the statesmen made
considerable efforts during the construction of the Hippodrome and Stadium
The iron profiles of each tribune came from Italia and cost 505.000 Italian Lirets.
The Governor of Ankara offered the Ministry of Internal Affairs to pay that bill by
foreign currency on the 30th of December in 1934. The Minister of Finance presented
this request to the Prime Ministry on the 15th January; 1935, and explained that
Governor Tandoğan’s offer about 505.000 Lirets payment to Italia was not
convenient to the Kliring 120 Pact statements. He added that, if the receipt of the
Central Bank for the deposited 505.000 Italian Lirets was presented to the
Directorate of Customs, the construction materials would be easily imported.
(appendix 47) The Minister of Economics, Mr. Bayar wrote about the same subject
to the Prime Ministry on the 26th of January in 1935. He expressed that both the
520A and 520B positions of Customs Instructions should benefit for the importation
of the galvanized and iron profiles of the tribunes of the parade way of Stadium and
Hippodrome. Furthermore, the importation of iron profiles over the limit of 45000
kilograms would depend on our exportation to Italia according to the Kliring Pact.
Bayar also pointed out, “If we do not obey the rules of Kliring Pact, our national
esteem will be damaged.” (appendix 48)
Finally, the written decree dated 04.02.1935 approved the paying back of the price of
the galvanized and iron profiles by benefiting the Kliring Pact rules and Customs
price lists. (appendix 49) The ministers decided to build these nine tribunes with
removable iron profiles for the Military parades. They claimed that, If they were
constructed by permanent profiles, they would narrow the field for view during the 120 Kliring [Clearing]: To exchange materials. The importers and exporters of different countries interrelated with eachother without using foreign currency. The clearing pacts decided the types and amounts of importing materials. “ Ekonomi Sözlüğü,” [Internet,WWW], ADDRESS: http://www.ekonomist.com.tr/apps/dictionary.app/dictionary.php/es.dict/kliring [Accessed: 04.05.2004]
60
horse races. The Italian firm Fratelli Nocenti would supply these stands profiles
which were going to serve 5300 people. (appendix 50)
According to official reports of Ministry of Interior Affairs, it should be suggested
that these removable tribunes were constructed and cost 48.000 Turkish Liras.
However, there are not any visual documents about these tribunes. In an article of
1937, Vietti Violi stated that, the removable system of these tribunes was
transformed to concrete structure in time.121 (Fig. 3.12)
Fig. 3.12 The First Class Tribunes of Hippodrome, 1937. Source: Rassegna di Architettura.
Besides, the technical equipments and their sub materials which would be used for
the Stadium and the Hippodrome’s construction and infrastructure had been
imported. The written decree dated 15.09.1934 with the number 2/1242 stated that
The Council of Ministers approved this importation on condition that these
121 Paola Vietti Violi, p. 5.
61
equipments would be given back their outlet according to the law of Customs Price
List with the number 1499. (appendix 51)
Another decision on equipments and tools used during the construction of the
Stadium and the Hippodrome was about borer equipment. The written decree with
the number 2/2470 dated 04.05.1935 stated that the boring tool could be imported
only if it was given back after the work finished. This decision was given by
following the Customs Price list law number 1449, article number 5. (appendix 52)
At the end, the construction of the first stage of the complex cost 1.604.264 Turkish
Liras and finished in 1935. (appendix 53) The remaining parts of the complex which
cost 750.000 TL were built in 1936. This stage of construction included the asphalt
cover of the roads around the Hippodrome, the landscape of the site, the second part
of tribunes of the Hippodrome, the furniture of the Hippodrome buildings, the
training spaces for football and athletics, hurdle race track way of Hippodrome, car
parks, heating plants, and radio installations. (appendix 54) Jacques H.Lambert, in an
article on Ankara, stated that, in addition to these parts two outdoor swimming pools
and a ‘sport palace’ with its indoor swimming pool, rings, and gymnasiums of the
Stadium would be built in 1936.122
The statesmen decided to buy sculptures and forty engravings from France by retail
to decorate the Stadium and the Hippodrome. The written decree of the September
16th in 1936 indicated that the Kliring Pact of Turkey with France would cause a
delay in the maintenance of these work of arts. Thus, the Council of Ministers
approved the budget of 1.500 TL which would be given to Ankara Governorship as
the equivalent of the savings of special appropriation of Konkurhipik. (appendix 55)
As far as it is understood from a written decree dated 7 October 1937 that there was a
commission for landscape design and for the construction of the Stadium and the
Hippodrome in 1937. It is expressed in the same decree that the employees of the
government studied extensively to finish the projects. It was also interesting that the
President of the Republic and the cabinet approved the salary of these officials as
offered by the Ministry of Internal Affairs. (appendix 56)
122 Jacques H. Lambert, “Kemalist Ankara: Mimarî Techizatı ve Hipodromu,” Necmeddin Tuncel (trans), 1936, Nafia İşleri Mecmuası, no:7, p. 88.
62
Our analyses on the construction period of the Hippodrome suggested that the
construction of such a complicated project was realized in difficult conditions
between 1934 and 1938. The underdeveloped industry, financial problems and
inexperienced employees of the Early Republican Turkey directed the government to
foreign supplies. The state had to contact with Western countries to create a ‘Modern
Hippodrome and a Stadium Complex’.
3.1.8 The Results of the Construction
3.1.8.1 Paolo Vietti-Violi’s Other Projects for Sport and National
Festival Activities
Aslanoğlu, states that, Paolo Vietti-Violi was the only Italian architect working in the
capital during the 1930s. His first contact with Turkey began in 1932 when he
entered the international competition for the Exhibition Building of Ankara. By that
time he was already a practicing architect in Milan, an expert on sports centers of
which he designed nineteen in Italy as well as the author of a variety of other types of
civil architecture.123
One of the ideals of the new regime was to convey ‘National Sport Principles’ to
every citizen in Turkey. Therefore, the construction of sport spaces had some
priorities in development plans of the cities. It should be suggested that Vietti-Violi
was the architect of Sport spaces of the Early Republican Turkey during the 1930s.
He did not only design the Sport Complex of the capital city but also the ones in
other cities. The letter of the Director of Turkish Sport Association, A. Menderes, to
Republican People’s Party (RPP) General Secretary stated that Vietti-Violi had asked
for the payments of his projects on Sport Fields at different cities. Menderes wrote:
There was not any information about the cost of these projects. Some of them might be recently paid by the Party or local institutions. Meanwhile, all these plans are preliminary designs and detailing projects have not been drawn yet. These detailing projects will be the complementary of the preliminary projects; it will be adventagous for us to continue our studies with Mr. Violi. We have informed his representative about our requests and asked for a proposal. I am waiting for your order to pay the bills of designs of Vietti-Violi by our Association’s budget.
123 Aslanoğlu, p.17.
63
The attachment of the letter presented the list of fifteen cities of which Violi designed
projects of Sport Fields between 1933 and 1937. The location and time of the
projects are: Trabzon in 1933; Afyon, Erzurum and Eskişehir in 1934; Samsun,
İstanbul Sarayburnu Stadium, and İstanbul Sürgop Stadium in 1935; Edirne, Isparta,
Kütahya, Adana, Aydın, and Tekirdağ in 1936; Bursa, and Manisa in 1937.
(appendix 57)
Vietti-Violi sometimes visited Ankara and stayed at Ankara Palace Hotel. He got
information about international competitions of some other official buildings and
made applications to them. . One of his letters to the Prime Minister İnönü expressed
his complaints about not to be invited to the international competitions of the Grand
National Assembly and the Prime Ministry Buildings’ projects. He noted:
Your appreciation to my affinity and loyalty on variable projects which were attributed to me during last years encouraged me to request my name in the list of foreign architects who will enter the competition. Since I know the conditions of the city, the construction materials, the workmanship with their advantages and disadvantages, and since I have experiences about these projects and conditions of competitions before, I ensure that my proposal could be better than others’ projects already now. (appendix 58)
İnönü replied this letter on the 19th July 1937 and stated that his name was
unintentionally forgotten.124
The second stage of the construction program of the Hippodrome and the Stadium
included building outdoor and indoor swimming pools, but they had not been
constructed yet. Another letter written by Vietti-Violi to the Prime Minister from the
Ankara Palace Hotel on the 10th July, 1937 was about the swimming pools of the
capital city. The style of the letter and approaches of Violi suggested that he knew
how he could persuade the government as he always mentioned the examples at
Western cities and modernization project of the Turkish Republic. He stated that:
The first stage of the sport facilities of the capital city has been finished. I am glad to confirm that both Turkish nation and official departments welcomed these projects which were built by the requests of Governor Nevzat Tandoğan and Excellency. I can easily confirm that the people of Ankara are more interested in sport centers than the people in any European country. The people visiting Ankara stadium is the % 12-15 of
124 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 19.07.1937, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.10/238.608.35.
64
the population while this amount is %5 in European cities. Meanwhile, the success of the Hippodrome is obvious. The success of these projects which were created for Turkish nation encourages me to request an enterprise for completing the sport center by building the indoor swimming pool. It is necessary for women and men who are working for the future of the nation, at Ministries, banks, offices, markets, etc. of this administrative city. The foreign governments have noticed this requirement and constructed indoor pools at Berlin, Paris, Budapest, Vienna and Rome in recent years. Ankara is one of most modernized cities, and has to be as good as European cities. I have presented my projects to Municipalities of Istanbul and Ankara but they are waiting for your approval. Your love and care on Turkish nation’s presence and health encourages me to write this letter. (appendix 59)
Vietti-Violi continued his studies at his office in Milan in 1938. He sent the plans of
Eskişehir, Kütahya, Bursa sport fields. One more city, Kırklareli, was also added to
his projects. Moreover he sent the projects of indoor swimming pool and the Sport
Palace of Ankara. He tried to persuade the Minister of Internal Affairs, Şükrü Kaya,
for building an Olympic Stadium at Istanbul. On the 6th May, 1938 he wrote a letter
reporting the profits gaining from football matches at Milan and compared it with
Istanbul to show the advantages of constructing a stadium.125 Meanwhile the Turkish
Sport Association had doubts about the Vietti-Violi’s designing and controlling
prices. They were nearly three times more than the sum that was calculated by
Turkish Sport Association. (appendix 60)
The 1920s and 1930s was a period when the politicians used sport facilities for
nationalistic ideals. Hitler’s Germany and Mussolini’s Italy were the pioneers in
these activities and believed that a healthy nation is a good representation of the
permanence of the race and the fascist ideology. Architecture was a tool for
popularizing these performances in society, thus the hippodromes and the stadiums
became the symbols of nations in an international milieu. The nations aimed to build
the largest Stadium to gather more people in their party rallies, national festivals and
sport activities. The Turkish architect Seyfettin Nasıh had gone to Germany and
sportsman Selim Sırrı [Tarcan] had gone to Italy in 1933 to investigate the Stadiums
and sport facilities of European nations.126 Paolo Vietti-Violi had been the chief
architect of the Sport Fields of Turkish Republic as he had conveyed his experiences 125 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 06.05.1938, Unpublished Official Document, no: 490.01/569.2266.1. 126 They had reported their observations in journals: Mimar Seyfettin Nasıh, 1933, “Stadyumlar: Almanya Stadyumları hakkında bir tetkik raporu,” Arkitekt no:9-10, pp.314-299; Selim Sırrı, 1933, “ İtalya’da Halk ve Gençlik Teşkilâtı,” Ülkü Nisan 1933, pp. 243-241.
65
of Italia. It was also a good chance for his architectural career to work in Turkey,
which needed modern sport areas.
3.1.8.2 Activities after Construction
The construction of the Hippodrome finished in 1936 and the horse races started.
These races were arranged within spring and autumn tracks. The first spring run of
the Hippodrome was realized between the 10th of May and the 14th of June, 1936 and
nearly 2500 people watched these races every week.127
The Governor of Ankara Mr. Tandoğan wrote a report to the Race and Improvement
Council about the construction expenses of the Sport Complex of Ankara and race
inputs. He informed that they had spent 1.457.525 TL until 1937 and 717.983 TL in
1937. Thus, the total expenses for the construction of the Hippodrome and the
Stadium was 2.175.508 TL. The amount of fund which was appropriated for the
construction of these buildings was 72.390 TL in 1937. The amount of 31.587,57 TL
of this fund had been spent and the remaining part would be spent until 1938.128
The Stadium of Ankara was opened on the 17th of December, 1936 with a grand
ceremony. However, some parts of the complex had not finished yet, as the Governor
and Vietti-Violi mentioned in the letters presented above. İsmet İnönü made a
speech and declared: “… the people who administer Turkey will constitute stadiums
like a precious school every where. The youth who will administrate Turkey in the
future will be trained at these open areas. Let’s celebrate our festival… Let’s
celebrate our hero’s, Atatürk’s, festival…”129
3.2 NATIONAL CELEBRATIONS
3.2.1 Early National Festivals
127 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 3.71936, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.10/186.279.6 ;Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 27.01.1937, Unpublished Official Document, no:030.10/186.281.2.
128 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 09.02.1937, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.10/186.281.1.
129 Atabeyoğlu, p. 99.
66
Commemorations have some autonomous characteristics which were free from the
cultural, social and political systems. Although they were used for particular
purposes and taken place at specific environments by specific actors on specific days,
they have a power above time and space. Hakan Karateke, in a book about
ceremonies of Ottoman Empire, points out:
It is a fault to attach some characteristics of origins of ceremonies and the natural results of these characteristics, either to any kind of authority or society, or the modern or pre-modern period. Ceremonies usually cause similar effects whatever the properties of target mass.130
All nations such as fascist Italy, national socialist Germany, colonized Caribbean, or
United Kingdom commemorated some special events to define their existence and to
signify something they had selected at any time in their history. Also, both Turkish
people and other ethnicities of the Ottoman Empire commemorated some events
related with “holy” monarchy and Islam.131 However, the celebrations of Ottoman
tradition were not sustained after the Turkish Republic since the ‘New Regime’ came
with changes in social, cultural and political fields.
A specific generation of the Early Republican Period witnessed both the Ottoman
Empire and the Republican period celebrations. The Ottoman traditions were only
remembered on national festive days of the Republican Period to signify the
difference between the two regimes and to support the new one which was on power.
On the 29th of October 1972, Velidedeoğlu wrote his memories on Ottoman
ceremonies in a newspaper and expressed the people who showed their respect to
monarch with their cries ‘Sultan, live long.’ Then, he noted the transformations of
commemorative days and pointed out the faithfulness of society to the Republican
regime. He wrote that:
The ascending of one person to throne was celebrated on cülus festival in the past, but we are celebrating the nation’s confiscation of its self
130 Hakan T.Karateke, “Merasimleri Anlamak,” 2004, Padişahım Çok Yaşa: Osmanlı Devletinin Son Yüz Yılında Merasimler (İstanbul: Kitap Yayınevi), p.209.
134 As it is explained by Karateke, Beyat, Cülus, Kılıç Kuşanma, Muayede, Cuma Selamlığı, 10th July, Kabul, and Kandil are the ceremonies of the last century of the Ottoman Empire. The Sultan and his “imaginary holiness” was the main issue of all these ceremonies. Since the Sultan has also a religious authority these commemorations had taken place mostly around the mosques and palaces of the capital city, İstanbul. These ceremonies were announced to all parts of country to constitute same feelings about the ‘same’ country’s Sultan and ‘same’ religion’s (for Muslims) caliph.
67
sovereignty at present. From now on we know that the natural and the holy law is not ‘Sultanate’, rather the real natural law is ‘national sovereignty’.132
The new established ideals gave a new shape to the memories of the Ottoman which
were not performative. In other words, the Republican regime of Turkey re-
constructs and re-writes the Ottoman history and the issues which symbolize the
‘Ottoman’ settle to our social memory according to those constructions of nation-
state. In that sense, Connerton points out:
Across generations, different sets of memories, frequently in the shape of implicit background narratives, will encounter each other; so that, although physically present to one another in a particular setting, the different generations may remain mentally and emotionally insulated, the memories of one generation locked irretrievably as it were, in the brains and bodies of that generation.133
Nationalism had been one of the important debates that had been subjected to many
discussions before the Turkish Grand National Assembly was founded on the 23rd of
April 1920. Ziya Gökalp wrote in an essay in Türk Yurdu [Turkish Fatherland] in
1913 that:
Today the West as well as the East shows unmistakably that our age is the Age of Nations. The most powerful force over the mind of this age is the ideal of nationalism. States, which have to govern on the basis of national consciousness, are doomed to failure if they ignore the existence of this important social factor. If our statesmen and party leaders do not hold this ideal, they cannot establish a spiritual leadership over the communities and the peoples constituting the Ottoman state…134
As it is understood from this paragraph the ideal of nationalism did not began with
the Republican Period. There had been many agitations on ‘nationalism’ before the
foundation of the Republic in Turkey and the national festivals had a proper form
before 1923. However, those celebrations and ceremonies did not refer to past as
usual but they refer the future of the nation and ideals of nationalism.
132 H.V.Velidedeoğlu, 29.10.1972, “ Cumhuriyet 49. Yılında,” Cumhuriyet Newspaper, p.2 133 Connerton, p. 3. 134 Ziya Gökalp, “The Nature of Ideals, in Niyazi Berkes (ed and trans.), 1959, Turkish Nationalism and Western Civilization: Selected Essays of Ziya Gökalp (New York. Colombia University Pres), p. 72.
68
Fig. 3.13 The Celebrations in 1920. Source: The Publications of the Ministry of Culture.
This photograph (fig. 3.13) had been taken in front of the Assembly building is
showing the people who gathered for praying for the Turkish army’s success in
National Independence War on Ramadan, 6 May 1920. Although it was a religious
festival, the celebration performed in the square represented the consciousness and
excitement of society on national sovereignty and solidarity. In addition, the
celebration of the first anniversary of the establishment of the Turkish National
Assembly on the 23 of April 1921 was the most important chance to create positive
enthusiasms among people for the new ideals of the assembly. Therefore, the
politicians met with the society in front of the assembly building. Although it was not
a professional organization, it was a commemoration of the new legitimate order.
Meanwhile, the first convention of the assembly on national festivals was made on
23 April 1921. Sibel Özbudun states that there were arguments about declaring a
festival in the courts. The law proposal of Saruhan Deputy Refik Şevket Bey, about
the declaration of the 23rd April as a ‘national festival’ was objected by Konya
Deputy Vehbi Efendi. He gave the example of azan and expressed, “Bayram arises
from heart of the nation. We cannot force and support the nation with an obvious
demonstration. If we want to raise the force of the nation we have to provoke them
69
from their belief.”135 Özbudun explains that these discussions reflected an identity
problem which was caused from the duality of Islam vs. nation, and this antimony
was solved through the national identity’s favor.136 Most of the politicians believed
that official ceremonies have effective role in legitimatizing and widening the
national aspects. Despite the objections against secularism, the 23rd April was
announced as a national festival. The decision was approved by the President
Mustafa Kemal and the Council of Ministers on the 23rd November, 1921. A
committee gathered by the Muslim Laws, the Internal Affairs, and the National
Defense Ministries was charged to assign official and religious holy days and their
ceremonies. (appendix 61)
Fig. 3.14 The Parade of Turkish Soldiers who were going to war, 25 December 1921. Source: The Publications of the Ministry of Culture.
135 Sibel Özbudun, “Bölüm 4: Türkiye Cumhuriyetinde Devlet ve Tören,” 1997, Ayinden Törene: Siyasal İktidarın Kurulma ve Kurumsallaşma Sürecinde Törenlerin İşlevi (İstanbul: Anahtar Kitaplar Yayınevi), p.139. 136 Özbudun, p. 138.
70
It should be suggested that early national celebrations of Turkish republic were not
well organized and ‘mass-producing’ activities, but we have to consider that the
Independence War was still going on. (fig.3.13, fig.3.14) For this reason, ‘military’
was the most important aspect of the agenda and there were some parades in front of
the assembly which was a representation of the determination on national struggle.
(fig.3.14)
The declaration of national festivals for the foundation of the Republic was decided
on the 14th December, 1924. According to a written decree, the Turkish Government
declared the 29th October as the only national and ‘official’ day of the year. It is
interesting that the statesmen took American and European nations as models and
determined to organize an official, regular ceremony only on this particular day. The
schools and the governmental institutions were the main participants of those formal
celebrations. The importance of the 29th October was declared as Hakimiyet-i
Milliye’s (National Sovereignty’s) last and most successful goal. Moreover, the 23rd
of April was expressed as a turning point that exposed the end of Sultanate and
establishment of national sovereignty. The Ministries and the President agreed on
making a law that would legislate these two days as the National Days of the Turkish
Republic, which would be commemorated with special ceremonies. (appendix 62)
The cabinet enacted the law that, “The national ceremony will only be performed on
the date of the Foundation of the Turkish Republic, 29th October, in Turkey and its
external representatives” on the 19th of April, 1925. That means the 23rd April was
not going to be celebrated as a ‘national’ festival but as an ‘official’ day. 137
Afterwards, the government studied on the structure of ceremonies and decided three
articles about the instructions of the official practices. The written decree dated the
21st April, 1925 [1341], states that:
Article 1: An official ceremony is performed at the center of the Republic on 29th October of every year. While the leaders of the government participates the ceremony all over Turkey, the ambassadors, the consuls and their representatives organize an official reception out of Turkey on behalf of the government. The administrative and military officials of Turkey participate to these ceremonies together with the representatives of foreign countries who have to perform according to
137 Sami N. Özerdim, 1996, Atatürk Devrim Kronolojisi (Ankara: Çankaya Belediyesi Yayınları), p. 89.
71
protocols. Both the program of the ceremony and the official reception has to be announced at the proper time. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs determines and informs the program of the reception in foreign countries. This National Festival is holiday.
Article 2: The offices of government are closed during all other national and religious festivals. Official ceremonies and receptions are not performed. General visits and congratulations will happen privately in the committees.
Article 3: Council of Ministers is appointed for putting these instructions into practice. (appendix 63)
Fig. 3.15 Celebrations at the ramp road of İstiklal Avenue, 1926. Source: Ankara Posta Kartları ve Belge Fotoğrafları Arşivi.
Another official festival was declared on the 1st of April 1926 with the law number
795; Victory Bayram (the 30th of August). The program of the celebration and the
military ceremony were proposed by the National Defense Ministry on the 24th of
August 1926 and accepted by Gazi Mustafa Kemal and the cabinet. (appendix 64)
The first celebration of the 30th August was performed in Dumlupınar, Çay Village in
1924 before the legislation. Prof. Bedrettin Tuncel states that Fevzi and Kazım
Pashas and the Education Minister Vasıf Bey were appointed to prepare the program
of the ceremony. The author points out, “Atatürk used his intelligence, foreseeing
72
character and planned to celebrate the 30th of August to explain the Turkish nation’s
illuminating future aims.” The explanations at Hakimiyet-i Milliye Newspaper
express that the officials, statesmen, visitors, sportsmen, teachers and people went to
the site of celebration by automobiles, trucks and train. The crowd took its position
according to a sketch showing people’s place in the ceremony. After sacrificing an
animal, Gazi and his wife Latife Hanım lay the foundation of a monument, Meçhul
Asker Anıtı,(Unknown Soldier). Gazi made an important speech emphasizing the
struggle of the Turkish nation not only as a military victory, but also as a cultural
one. He explained that the success in civilization project would only be realized by
reforms and added that Turkish people had to change their life according to the
developments and inventions in technology and civilization. Thus, it was impossible
to exist as a nation which was depictive to its past and outdated understandings. This
speech of President M. Kemal ended with applauses and screams of citizens. People
prayed to God in front of the grave of Meçhul Asker, and then the parade of soldiers
and scouts was performed. 138
It is understood that although the national festivals of the Turkish Republic had been
legitimized by laws and regulations, they had a proper phase which aroused from the
ideals of the statesmen. The main aspects of that phase were the newly invented
activities and spaces which would gain a traditional character because of their
potentially commemorational existence. The ceremonies were simple but meaningful
as they guided people to the constructed aims. The laws for the national and the
official festivals developed in relation to the changes in social life. Their legitimacy
was on the agenda of assembly courts until the 27th of May, 1935 and completed with
the law of ‘National Festivals and General Holidays’. Özbudun states:
According to this law; the day of the Foundation of the Republic (29th of October) is appointed as a national festival. In addition, 30 August Victory and 23 April National Sovereignty festivals were announced. Beside these official festivals, Muslim festivals of Sacrifice Day and Ramadan were declared as religious festivals. The unofficial festival of 1 May Workers Festival was converted to Spring Festival. The New Year’s Day became an official holiday. Moreover, the 19th May Youth and Sport Festival will be celebrated instead of the 16th May Airplane Festival in time.139
138 Bedrettin Tuncel,1972, Atatürk ve 30 Ağustos Zaferi’nin İlk Kutlanışı (Ankara: TTK) , p. 47-11. 139 Özbudun, p. 146.
73
3.2.2 Main Aspects of the National Festivals
The celebrations of the national festivals in Turkey during the Early Republican
Period were arranged firstly for the purpose of ‘nation-construction’. The official
celebrations realized this construction process by representing the political reality
and conveying the messages exist in its origin. Hobsbawm states that national
traditions are one type of invented traditions which means “a set of practices
normally governed by overtly or tacitly accepted rules and of a ritual or symbolic
nature, which seek to inculcate certain values and norms of behavior by
repetition.”140 The structure of Turkish national celebrations can be analyzed with the
aspects which are outlined by Hobsbawn.
The ritual and the symbolic nature of the festivals need invention of appropriate time
and space. As we have seen in the previous chapter, the dates of the national festivals
were institutional arrangements and legitimated by laws. Anthony Smith, in his book
Nationalism and Modernism, writes:
Hobsbawn distinguishes two types of nationalism and two kinds of analysis of nations and nationalism. The first type is that of mass, civic and democratic political nationalism, modeled on the kind of citizen nation created by the French Revolution. It was followed by a second type of ‘ethno-linguistic’ nationalism, in which smaller groups asserted their right to separate from large empires and create their own states on the basis of ethnic and /or linguistic ties. The first focuses on official or governmental ideas and institutions, and is ‘top-down’ and elite-based. The other one is concerned with popular beliefs and sentiments, and so becomes a community based view ‘from below’.141
The dynamics of Turkish Republic were realized and assumed by the leadership of a
group of military-civilian bureaucrats who found the solutions of problems at values
arising from the Western World.142 They gave efforts on national celebrations to
introduce their goals to public and other nations. These politicians could not use the
traditions of the Ottoman as Hobsbawm points out, “New formalizations could not be
supported by the old traditions and new traditions are resulted from inability to use or
140 Hobsbawm and Ranger, p. 1. 141 Anthony Smith,” Two Stages of Nationalism,” …, Nationalism and Modernism: A critical Survey of Recent Theories of Nations and Nationalism (London and New York: Routledge), p. 121. 142 Özbudun, p. 130.
74
adapt old ones.”143 In addition to enacting new laws for constructing national
festivals, the state gave effort on symbolic construction of creating a sense of unity.
Lyn Spillman stated that the most concrete national symbols are the most susceptible
to change because a charged bond between concrete symbol and referent is more
easily blocked or suspended than that between a more abstract or multivalent symbol
and referent.144 Therefore, when Turkish Republican regime gained power, its
symbols such national flag and the anthem, were re-created, officially recognized and
then protected by the laws. Afterwards, they are introduced to society by many
memorial practices for which symbols are valuable tools.
The Republican People’s Party which was on power arranged his ideals in six
principles. Özbudun believes that three important principles of ‘New Order’ in
Turkey had structured the basis of national festivals. These are Secularism,
Nationalism and Populism.145
The religion was effective on social and political realities of society and reflected its
power over the ‘old traditions’ until secularism came into force with radical
transformations. The religion was inspected by the state and the social life was
purified from the effects of Islam after the revolution.146
The reforms supported by Secularism were also affecting the program of the
National Festivals. The rituals and the symbols of celebrations were purified from
religious significations which had an important role in Ottoman ceremonies,
theocratic in nature. The men and women of any religion were wearing their
‘modern’ clothes and watching the ceremonies in the same tribunes sitting side by
side. The women took part in the performances of the parades. The mosques were
lightened at nights as a part of decoration of buildings. The letter of a Mufti to
muezzins dated 27th October, 1928 expresses, “The minarets of the mosques have to
be lightened on the 29th October since it is the day of the Republican Festival.”
(appendix 65) Before the declaration of the Secularism Principle of the new regime,
praying for national desires had been a ritual performed by Atatürk and his comrades.
When the assembly declared the foundation of the Republic on the 29th October, 143 Hobsbawm and Ranger, p. 2. 144 Spillman, p. 164-165. 145 Özbudun, pp. 131-130. 146 Özbudun, pp. 129-126.
75
1923, Atatürk and deputies prayed to God and then closed the session.147 After the
declaration of Secularism Principle the situation is just the opposite.
A letter written by the Minister of Internal Affairs to the Prime Ministry in 1926
about an investigation at Amasya suggested the control of state over officials in
adapting the rituals of national festive days. It was noted in the letter that there was a
complaint about Amasya Müfti’s clothes and his attempts in praying on the
Republican Festival Day. However, after the investigation of Ministry of Internal
Affairs it was understood that there had not been any praying ritual in the program of
the celebration and the Mufti had not asked people to pray during the celebration.
(appendix 66)
The populism of the Turkish Republic intended a social order and solidarity instead
of class struggles. Despite their different ethnic roots, everyone would be equal
according to the Turkish constitution. All these were always mentioned in the
programs of the Republican People’s Party. The conference text of the High
Commission of the Celebrations of 10th Anniversary of the Republican Festival
explained the Populism aspect of Republican People’s Party for presenting in
celebrations at foreign countries. The director notes that:
The populism principle of the Republican People’s Party aims to provide a social order and solidarity and to establish agreements on benefits instead of class struggles. The Party accepts the people as populist who accept the equality of people according to laws, and does not advocate the privilege of any individual, any family, any class and any community. (appendix 67)
There had not been close relations between the citizen and the officials since the
Ottoman period and this situation did not change during the Republican period. In
1933, Nusret Kemal expressed “the gap between the state, policemen, soldier,
official and the society emerged from the impossibility of public security, justice and
education during the war years.” In his essay published in Ülkü, he wrote that:
147 Dr. Cengiz Kürşat, Ekim 1999, “Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi’nde Cumhuriyetin Kabulü,” Belgelerle Türk Tarihi Vol.33, pp. 29-19.
It should be a usual ritual as it was declared in the 2. Article of 1921 Constitution [Teşkilâtı Esasiye Kanunu] that: “The religion of Turkish State is Islam and the official language is Turkish.”
76
Only the training of the people should evoke emotional feelings to remove this negativity. The joining of classes and exciting atmosphere of the national festivals can only train people. We have to abstain from capitalist class struggles of Europe. The celebrations of the 10th anniversary of the Foundation of the Republic will realize not only emotional but also intellectual training of society. The state and the society, the villager and the city people will come together with this intellectual wave created by the festivals. It is unique event in the history of Turkey and may be in the history of all nations.148
Another important point, “the control and the pressure over the public”, was
mentioned in this critical essay. The author pointed out:
The Turkish society had forgotten the inhibitions of the old regime and entered the New Order with a clear, open mind. However, the new rapid principles and the goals of the revolution arises new powerful inhibitions. We have to calm down this energy in an appropriate way. National festivals can only be the organizer which has the ability of both maintaining national identity and personal participation. The society will be more excited by adding something to festival from its origin. Soviet and Italian festivals may compete with us in national festival organizations but their festivals are limited by strict rules which can not create an intimate atmosphere.149
Frederick J. Corney, in his essay on the October Revolution as a memory project,
claims that “The October Revolution, then, was above all a remembered event, an
event constituted as cultural and historical memory intended to legitimize the young
Soviet regime.”150 Corney explains the effort of Bolsheviks on fixing the memory of
the October Revolution in their minds not to dissipate its significance. He adds that
they immediately set about recording the revolution while it was still fresh in
people’s minds. Although the Soviet October Revolution caused a different regime,
the vehicles of the memory-construction were similar with the Turkish Republic.
Corney points out that the Soviets gave way to more organized and institutionalized
attempts to ground a new state during 1920s. He writes that:
These efforts were reinforced in turn by the accumulation of visual “evidence”: renamed streets and squares all over the country; new statues and plaques appropriately inscribed; decorated buildings and squares on the anniversaries of October; carefully choreographed
148 Kemal, pp. 250-249. 149 Kemal, p. 248. 150 Frederick J. Corney, “Rethinking a Great Event: The October Revolution as Memory Project,” in Jeffrey O. Click (ed.), 2003, States of Memory (Durham and London: Duke University Press), p. 25.
77
processions that literally mapped the Stages of Revolution onto the cities for the participants; photographs of the “seminal” revolutionary events (broadly conceived) and theirs leaders in newspapers and journals; museums intended to provide a coherent visual representation of the narrative of the October Revolution_ films commissioned from famous directories to “record” the evolution in the most dramatic terms possible (most notably, of course, Sergei Eisenstein’s Battleship Potemkin and October).(…) In the case of the October Revolution, thousands of men and women remembered it.151
In national festivals of Turkey, the decoration of the environment was considering as
important ‘visual evidence’ to catch the ‘National Festival soul’. The government
defined the main tools of decorations as national flag, plants, red and white ribbons,
sayings, boards and triumphal arches. They mentioned that “every place will be
decorated with flags as much as possible. (…) The night festival fireworks and
lighting equipments should increase the attractiveness and enthusiasm of night
celebrations.”152
The radio stations, newspapers and the periodicals of the Early Republican Period
motivated national themes during Festival days and had the role of social and
political unifier. (fig.3.15) They worked as the narrators of principles of the new
regime and supported the state for constructing a collective identity. This kind of
communication vehicles had also the ability of ‘selecting’ the events and
commemorating them which would be a part of social memory. Anderson states
“newspaper and novel are two forms of imagining which provided the technical
means for ‘re-presenting’ a kind of imagined community that is the nation.”153 The
daily “mass ceremony”154 of newspapers and radios make people to think themselves
and to relate themselves with others. When we read the program of the 1934
Republican Festival we realized that the politicians of Early Republican Period had
invented these daily ceremonies since they expressed their wish of the newspapers
and journals being larger, more illustrated, and colored in national festival days than
their ordinary editions. Moreover, the organizers designated the context of the essays
151 Corney, pp. 29-27. 152 1934 Cumhuriyet Yıl Dönümü Kutlama Talimatı,1934, (İstanbul: Devlet Matbaası), pp. 8-7. 153 Anderson, p.24. 154 Anderson, p.35.
78
and headlines. ‘The importance of the reforms, the freedom, and the works of the
republican period’ were the main themes that had to be mentioned.155
Fig. 3.16 The headline of Cumhuriyet Newspaper on the 30th of October, 1933. Source: The Archives of National Library, Ankara.
The letter of the Düzce Public House Director on the 12th of October, 1935 expressed
that the government organized and controlled the publications for creating national
collective memory by history writing. The director writes to RPP General Secretary
that:
We have received the books sent to House by post and taken them to our library. The name of books are: The History of Month, Vol: 82,83; the Sivas Speech of the Prime Minister İsmet İnönü; Rights of Goods; Siege of Vienna by Turks; Turkishness and The Evidences of Turkishness; Three Civilizations; Turkish Art; Instructions of Tree Festival. (appendix 68)
1551934 Cumhuriyet Yıl Dönümü Kutlama Talimatı,1934, (İstanbul: Devlet Matbaası), p. 14.
Original text is as:
Madde 20) Her vilâyetteki gazete ve mecmualar bayram günü her zamanki hacminden büyük, renkli, resimli çıkmalıdır. İnkılâp ve istiklâlin büyük kıymet ve ehemniyetini anlatacak mevzular ve yazılar bulunmalıdır. Devletin ve hususî idare ve belediyelerin cumhuriyet devri eserlerine de sütunlarda yer ayırmalıdırlar.
79
In addition, Ankara and Istanbul Radio Stations broadcasted the same program about
National Republican Festival which was published at newspapers before the 29th of
October, 1933. The program was starting with the Turkish National Anthem and
broadcasting the ceremony at Ankara. The following parts included the Speech of
Atatürk, national poems, and dance songs, conversations about the history of
Independence War and the Republican Period, and folkloric melodies.156
The capital city, Ankara, was the center for the organization and management works
of the national festivals. The program of celebrations were prepared in all its aspects
by the National Festivals Commission at Ankara and distributed to all officials
responsible from organization in other parts of the country and in foreign countries.
The Republican People’s Party High Commission of National Festivals presented
conferences to tell the context and the organization of the celebrations. They aimed
to create “a model for celebrating the National Festival in foreign countries” and in
all cities of fatherland. In one of those conferences which were about the 10th
anniversary of the foundation of the Republic, the Director of Commission stated that
the text of the meeting had translated to languages of those foreign countries to well-
inform the people about Turkey. Besides, the Ambassadors of Turkey were
responsible from festival organizations in foreign countries. (appendix 69)
In addition to the conferences, the Commission published instruction manuals for the
City Directories of the RPP which were executing the program in this network. The
details of the program had to be performed carefully to convey the meanings and the
aims of commemoration. Therefore it was written in the instruction book that “The
Festival Committees of each city had to report General Secretary how the
celebrations performed successfully according to the model document sent from the
Government.”157
Another document that presents the intentions of the Organization Committee on the
national aspects of the celebration is the letter of Kütahya Deputy on the 1st of
October, 1934. He stated that:
In order to celebrate the National Republic Festival all over the country in the same lively and vivacious way, this program has been prepared benefiting from the last years’ 10th Anniversary Celebration
156 28 Teşrinevvel [October]1933, Cumhuriyet Gazetesi, p.5. 157 1934 Cumhuriyet Yıl Dönümü Kutlama Talimatı,1934, (İstanbul: Devlet Matbaası), p.15.
80
Committee’s decisions and inspiring from the experiences and studies of the 10th Anniversary. The program is approved by The General Directory Committee and sent to the ministries of National Defense, the Internal Affairs, the Foreign Affairs and the National Education. I have received the answers from the Ministries that they had conveyed the decisions to sub-committees for celebrating the Republic Festival according to this [attached] program. The instructions for the public chairs and the program are attached to the letter. (appendix 70)
The introduction and the first article of the instruction book pointed out the
significance of celebration: “The celebration of anniversaries of the Foundation of
the Republic at whole country and foreign states’ representative offices is very
important for settling down our revolution. Our party’s organizations have to support
the activities arranged by the state in accordance with laws.” (appendix 71) The first
article contains the populist idea behind these festivals:
Article 1: The Festival will be celebrated in an enthusiasm which will arouse interest for the people of every city, village and the country, at sea, land and on air, at night and day. (…) The fundamental issue of festival is telling the inspirations of Republic to all classes of society by an energetic, meaningful, attractive celebration. In addition, we have to take precautions for interest and participation of whole society. (appendix 72)
The content of the published book was about the missions of the committees,
decorations, ceremonies, parades, visits, meetings, sport activities, conferences, balls
and entertainments. The committee of the each settlement (city, town, etc.) consisted
of the highest director, highest army official or his representative, mayor, the head of
RPP directory, the head of Public House, the director of Education or his/her official.
This commission had to prepare a program explaining how, when and where the
activities would occur and published the program one week before the festival. If
there were not any newspapers in the district the program would be publicized with
public announcement. The members would also control the decorations of the
buildings and the Republic Squares, propaganda devices (billboards, arches, opening
ceremonies of bridges, factories, etc.), the construction of tribunes for ‘heroes’
(mothers of martyrs and ghazis), officials, directories. The clothes of the participants
were especially mentioned in the seventh clause:
7) Everybody wears the newest and cleanest clothes. If it is possible, the party members put the small party flags sent to them for the 10th anniversary on their collars. It will be appropriate to distribute new clothes to the students and the employees which are habitually obtained by schools and official departments. The parents should maintain new
81
clothes for their children for this day. Moreover, the charities should hand out new clothes and objects to poor people on this day. (appendix 73)
The letter of the Director of Society for the Protection of Children [Çocuk Esirgeme
Kurumu] to the RPP General Secretary, Recep Peker, explained the studies on the
performance of festivals both in Ankara and other cities in 1935. The director
expressed:
We are studying for maintaining good and successful celebrations for the day and the week of 23 April Children Festival at Ankara which will be a good model for other cities. Thus we want to film this ceremony. We are asking for your commands to your Secretary’s film officials with their equipments to meet with our Department. (appendix 74)
These efforts on creating a ‘model’ for national festivals were part of a memory
project. The standardization and repetitive specialty of these performances would
maintain the stability and the permanence of the regime. The society had to be
trained for being ‘ideal citizens’ who approved the power and its systems. In that
sense Hobsbawm states that, modern ‘invented traditions’ mostly establish or
symbolize social cohesion or the membership of groups, real or artificial
communities. 158 The populist ideology hidden behind the national festivals of Turkey
suggested that the new regime “aimed to socialize, by inculcating beliefs, value
systems and conventions of behavior.”159
One of the aspects of national festivals is their symbolic dimension. Politics uses
symbolism’s potency to attract the social memory and conquer the imagination of
individuals. Sabina Behrenbeck, in her essay on political ceremonies of Nazi Regime
in Germany, points out that a political ceremony usually conveys a message by
means of signs and symbolic actions, and adds that these means consist of myths,
symbols and rituals. Behrenbeck writes that:
The ceremonies of a democratic state, Redslob argued, should not degrade the people to mere spectators, as did the monarchy’s ceremonies, but should be built around the people. The arts, particularly music and poetry, should be the mediators between the state and people.
158Hobsbawm and Ranger, p. 9. 159 Hobsbawm and Ranger, p. 9.
82
Artistic representation of transpersonal values was seen as the key to solemn, yet popular, form of ceremonies. 160
Fig. 3.17 28.10.1933, The Work of a Baker. Source: Cumhuriyet Newspaper
This picture drawn by a baker for the 10th Anniversary of the Foundation of the
Republic shows how an abstract entity, nation, became effective in the imagination
of citizens that is caused by strong efforts on memory construction projects. This
picture published in Cumhuriyet [Republic] newspaper with a note as “a picture that
represents our revolution drawn by a baker employee.” The journalist writes that:
This is not a picture; this is a significant and sensitive representation of our grand revolution, moreover a balance of our revolution. (…) The grey wolf symbolizes the Turkishness and runs towards West. The letter ‘C’, on the right,[the capital letter of Cumhuriyet in Turkish], represents our beginning of Republic, and the letter ‘T’, on the left, [the capital letter of Türkiye in Turkish] represents our approaching to West in ten years time. The emblem in the middle of wolf above the word ‘Ankara’ is representing the history of our revolution. (…) Above all we are
160 Sabina Behrenbeck, “The Nation Honours the Dead: Remembrance Days for the Fallen in the Weimar Republic and the Third Reich,” in K. Friedrich (ed.), 2000, Festive Culture in Germany and Europe: New Approaches to European Festival Culture (Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press), p. 307.
83
seeing our Grand Genius’s picture in a star as a symbol of this great revolution. The background consists of Turkey map including new factories, railways and Unknown Soldier Monument. 161
Connerton explains that “…ritual functions to communicate shared values within a
group and to reduce internal dissension; what rituals tell us, on this view, is how
social stability and equilibrium are constituted.”162 Rituals play a major role for the
conception of national meanings. They have the power to create reality around the
national aspects by psychological effects. The ceremonies of the Turkish Republic
were dominated by the government’s institutions and “the power of rites based on
potency of its symbols and its social context.”163 The Turkish Revolution needed
‘social solidarity and national integration’. The ritualized environment of the national
festivals had a persuasive side because of the power felt by citizens. “Ritual action is
repetitive and, therefore, often redundant, but these very factors serve as important
means of channeling emotion, guiding cognition, and organizing social groups.
Symbolization gives the action much more important meaning.”164
When we study on narrations of the celebrations of the 10th anniversary of the
Republic at the Hippodrome, we get the sense that there was such an ambiance that
made people feel the national integrity. That emotional atmosphere in the crowd let
them yelling together: “Live long, Gazi! We will never return from your way”. 165
These people surrounded with the symbols of Revolution had been yelling, “Live
long our Sultan!”166 during festivals of Old Regime. Although the same society spoke
to different heroes of opposite regimes the means what made them excited are the
same soul and magic of the festival. It is obvious that the reasons of this atmosphere
had been broken by a political shift and transformed to the revolutionary feelings and
the ideals of the Republican Period.
Indeed, ritual is an important means of influencing people’s ideas about political events, political policies, political systems, and political
161 28 Teşrinevvel [October] 1933, Cumhuriyet Newspaper ,p. 6. 162 Connerton, p. 49. 163 D.Kertzer, “The Rites of Power” 1988, Ritual, Politics and Power (London and New Heaven: Yale University Press), p. 179. 164 Kertzer, p. 9. 165 Enver Behnan, 1934, Cumhuriyetin Onuncu Yıldönümü Ankara’da Nasıl Kutlandı (Ankara: Hakimiyet-i Milliye Matbaası), p. 12. 166 Velidedeoğlu, p. 2.
84
leaders. (…) Political understandings are mediated through symbols, and ritual, as a potent form of symbolic representation, is a valuable tool in our construction of political reality.167
The celebrations of the Turkish Republic became uniform throughout the country by
repetitive rituals. Moreover, “ritualization entails the repetitive use of emotionally
charged symbols in symbolically significant locations at symbolically appropriate
times”168 This occasion support the permanence and stability of celebrations which
were invented at some point and joined the collective memory in time.
Therefore, the nationalistic political mind behind the construction of cities required
some political public spaces for national celebrations. The built-environments
constructed after the Republican regime gave place to some significant sites for
performative and formal practices of celebrations and most of those spaces called
“Republican Square”. On the 16th February, 1938 the Minister of the Internal Affairs
Şükrü Kaya reported the instructions for the 19th May Sport and Youth Festival to
Governor and to the RPP Directorship. The third article about the celebrations
expressed that “students (primary, high, university) and sportsmen would gather at
sport areas (if there was not any sports area they would be gathered at the Republican
Squares) at fifteen o’clock.” (appendix 75) This letter shows the control of the state
on development plans of cities was firstly towards national meanings during the
Early Republican Period.
Another published document about the 20th Anniversary of the Republican Festival
pointed out the rules of preparing the sites under the title of ‘Committees and their
Works’ as follows:
Article 5: The committee has to publish and distribute the program which explains how and where the festival is going to be celebrated ten days before the celebration. (…) Article 6: The cities and towns have to be decorated with peculiar ornaments signifying the national festival. We have to pay attention for a) finishing the decorations before the festival day, b) removing the ornaments like triumphal arches after celebration. Article 7: The places of arches and slogans at streets and boulevards have to be determined by the Committee. Article 8: Everyone have to wear their newest and cleanest clothes. Philanthropic institutions should donate clothes to poor people before the celebration. (…) Article 10: The Republican Squares where the festival performed have to be cleaned and arranged. Especially, the decorative signs have
167 Kertzer, p. 78. 168 Kertzer, p. 92.
85
to catch our eyes mostly in these squares. Article 11: A sketch of the Republic Square has to drawn for the security and order of the society before the celebration. The locations of the participants have to be drawn on the sketch and signed carefully by flags and signboards.169 (fig. 3.18)
Fig. 3.18 The sketch of the Hippodrome showing the positions of participants the parade in 1934. Source: The Government Archives.
In addition to these, the Hippodrome which was constructed as a race site, called
“The Republican Square” of Ankara which was officially used in correspondences,
manuals of national festivals.
Security was one of the issues that affects the program and realization of festivals.
Kertzer points out, “Ritual serves … a means of establishing and maintaining social
order through the formalization of symbolic behavior, especially when the opposition
169 Cumhuriyetin 20. Yılı Nasıl Kutlandı, 1943, pp. 6-4.
86
within society is not sufficiently strong to initiate radical changes.”170 In the early
Republican Turkey, there were communities resist to the new regime, but the security
powers of the state detain them before operating. Especially on festival days the
government gave importance to security especially in public spaces. The letter of the
Ministry of Internal Affairs to the Prime Ministry about the precautions of security
offered by Ankara Governor proved the control of the government over whole city
during the 1934 Celebrations. According to this report the Minister of Internal
Affairs, Kaya, determined the principles of security precautions on the 21st of
October, 1934 in a meeting. The Governor reported that:
1. Şükrü Kaya had presented the last attacks of the terrorist groups in Europe and had pointed out the incautiousness of the policemen. Then, he attracted attention to the vigilance of Security Powers of the Turkish Republic and warned about the precautions for similar terrorist attacks at Ankara on the festival day.
2. The Ankara Governor, Nevzat Tandoğan, explained that they divided the security precautions into two as day and night. (appendix 76)
Precautions during daytime were grouped as: Between Çankaya and Assembly, at Assembly, Between Assembly and Hippodrome, at Hippodrome. It is mentioned in the letter that these security proposals were checked out one year before, on the 10th Anniversary. It should be suggested that the government gave extraordinary importance to the security because the policemen controlled not only the public spaces but also the houses. It was written that: Article 1.c: When President Ghazi came through Assembly from Çankaya, the people can only stand and stop at places where policemen give permission. The other side of the road will be forbidden for stopping and gathering. (…)
Article 1.d: The public residences at both sides of the road [Atatürk Boulevard] and their guest’s general missions will be determined and investigated secretly. If there are any suspicious people, the security powers will take measures.
Article 1.g: The workers of the buildings under construction along the road will move to other locations. (…)
At Celebration Site (Hippodrome)
Article 4.a: The area at the opposite of President’s tribune will be curtained with policemen.
At night: (…) The people who want to make a petition to the President will be investigated by policemen. (…)171
170 Kertzer, pp. 170-169. 171 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 21.10.1934. Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.10/198.352.18.
87
The military and the youth were the permanent aspects of these ‘invented traditions’.
“The military element in rituals symbolized the necessity of struggle and sacrifice
without which the nation would not exist.”172 The new generation in celebrations was
the signifier of the new regime and “incorporated the cultural and political
representation of the state ideology of ‘development’.”173
Fig. 3.19 19.05.1936, National Youth and Sport Festival, Ankara 19th May Stadium. Source: La Turqie Kemaliste.
The Republican People Party Program of 1935 emphasized the ‘training of body’
which is a result of ideals of ‘national socialist movements’ in Europe in the 1930s. 174 The fiftieth article of the Program explained the relation between Turkish Youth
172 Kertzer, p. 129. 173 Abidin Kusno, 2000, Behind the Postcolonial (USA: New York University), p. 106. 174 Özbudun, pp. 151-150.
88
and nationalism. According to this article: “The Turkish Youth will be brought up by
an ideology which makes them sacrifice themselves for a mission of protecting their
fatherland and the revolution. We are going to train their bodies to feed their national
beliefs and to give them health. In order to maintain successful results, we have to
develop the way of thinking, determining and enterprising of Turkish youth under
hard discipline. (…) the sport and revolution treatment will be the premise ideal.
New institutions and spaces will be constructed for sports”.175 (fig. 3.19)
The 19th May was approved as the National Youth and Sport Festival in 1936 instead
of the 16th of May Plane Festival.176 This tradition immediately fulfilled its meanings
and aspects by decisions and correspondences of politicians. The letter written by the
General Secretary of Republican People’s Party, dated 04.07.1936 proves the
invention of rituals and their back-up institutions with these sentences:
We have decided to celebrate the day of Atatürk’s landing to Samsun, the 19th May, as Sports Festival as a result of the desire in the last Congress of Sport. The Ministry of Culture informed the schools that the Gymnastic Festival would be celebrated on the same day while Turkish Sport Association informed its institutions. (…) Apart from that, I am asking for your support in adding the Halkevi to these performances. (appendix 77)
Şükrü Kaya reported that “the 19th May was the first step for awakening physical and
moral progress. This day which will be called as the 19th May, Sport and Youth
Festival, will be a device to inculcate citizens ideal of beautiful, active, honest and
brave human-beings; air, light, water, mountain love and to populate hygiene,
powerfulness and beauty of society. This is the understanding of the Republican
People’s Party”. (appendix 78)
The program of the celebrations was published and approved by the ministers. The
document written to the Directorate of Republican People’s Party and the Governor
dated the 16th of February, 1938 criticized the ceremonies organized the year before
and offered to add four new articles to exercise more exciting and attractive festival.
When we analyze the instruction document of the festival it is realized that the
tradition of National Festival reached to a quality. The need to search for this quality
made organizers to criticize the framework of the festivals. By the time they realized
175 Özbudun, p. 150. 176 Özbudun, p. 146.
89
what was needed in festivals, how the spatial activities could dominate the festival,
and how festivals could make Turkish Nation known by other nations.
A letter written by Turkey’s Ambassador to Serbia, Safvet Ürfi Netin in October
1938 shows the success of the constructions of the new regime in Turkey. This
document exposes the importance and necessity of commemorative ceremonies in
forming national identity and unity. It should be suggested that the Turkish People
who were living abroad ‘imagined the nation’ by celebrating these national festivals.
The Consul wrote:
I and my friends are glad to reach the 15th Anniversary of the Turkish Republic which is led by our Great Chief Atatürk. I want to notify the points that are written below:
On the 29th October morning, the Moslems in Serbia opened the Ankara Radio and listened to parade in highest honor. When Turkish people came to Consulate, they were still under the influence of celebrations and were crying. The congratulation letters which were sent from other parts of Serbia informed that the celebrations had been followed there, too. On the other side, Moslems who does not have any radios, gathered in Turkish cafes and listened to the announcer on foot. In addition, the announcer animated the scenes successfully. Thus, we felt great excitement and imagined that we were participating to the celebrations in Ankara. (appendix 79)
3.2.3 Tenth Anniversary Celebrations
Every tenth anniversary of gaining power has special significance for the nations.
First of all, the society and the administrative units review their own past and
criticize the present situation throughout the achievements and failures of the state
and the guiding principles of the regime. Pamela Sweet believes that national
holidays support the foundation of myths of the state which give coherence to a
state’s past and build consensus about a state’s guiding principles. In her book
Celebrating the Republic without Republicans: The Reichsverfassungstag in Berlin,
1929-32, she states that the Verfassungstag celebration in 1929 was a turning point.
The tenth anniversary celebration demonstrated conscious attempts made by the
republican leaders to compete aggressively with Nazi and Communist counter-myths
and to showcase the advantages of the republican life.177
177 Pamela Sweet, p.282
90
In that sense, The 10th Anniversary of the Republican Festival in Turkey had given a
chance of criticizing the success of the new regime. Nezahat Demirhan points out:
The ten years passing over the foundation of the Republic was the most critic and important period in Turkey. (…) The Turkish people and foreign nations were suspicious in the sustainability of the new Regime during the first decade of the Republic.178
Therefore, the government gave more attention to the festival for removing such kind
of doubts. Here, the Republican Regime’s concern will be on the way of constructing
national unity and identity through the celebrations of the 10th anniversary of the
Republic.
3.2.3.1 The Preparations
Firstly, the government began the preparations by putting laws into force. A group of
deputies prepared a bill which mentioned the importance of conveying the festival
tradition to the future generations and brought it to the Assembly on the 9th of June,
1933. They pointed out that:
(…)We believe that these preparations which are appropriate for the significance of the 10th Anniversary are not only a gratitude for our honored and successful past. Furthermore, this festival day is necessary to entrust future generations with tradition of modernization.179
This proposal was approved as the law number 2305 with the title “Celebrating the
Tenth Anniversary of the Foundation of the Republic” on the 11th of June, 1933.
Some other laws followed this main law and realized the legitimacy of all
organizations.180
The written decree dated the 6th of July, 1933 expressed the principles of the
commissions, committees and boards of cities which were responsible from the
organization of the 10th Anniversary. According to this document, there would be a
High Committee gathered by some deputies, ministers and their officials. The most
important mission of this committee was to appoint representatives to other cities for
178 Nezahat Demirhan, December 1997, “Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nin Onuncu Yıl Kutlamaları,” Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi Vol.13 (39), p. 141. 179 Elif Eke, October 1998, “Cumhuriyetin 10. Yıldönümü’nün Kutlanması Etkinlikleri İç ve Dış Basındaki Yankıları,” Belgelerle Türk Tarihi Vol.21, p.17. 180 The laws with the number: 2318, 2319, 2320, 2321.
91
organizing an identical festival all over the Turkey. (appendix 80) The third article of
the law 2305 stated that these committees would set the structure of celebrations on
the themes that presenting the successes of the Republic during last ten years and
aims of Republic in the future.181 For this reason, the High Committee prepared
manuals including the program of celebrations at villages and published it in Yurt
[Fatherland] newspaper.182
According to the law 2318 the expenses of the celebrations were detached from the
government budget of the year 1933 and 50.000 TL of this amount was obtained by
making reductions from the budgets of all ministries.183 The letter of National
Education Ministry to Prime Ministry dated 24th of July, 1933 proved that the
government organized the price lists of the activities and informed the ministries
about them in details. Afterwards, the ministries checked the lists and put out the
works to tender. Thus, the National Education Minister asked the Prime Minister for
the approval of the tendering for the urgent works of the celebration which cost 7.500
TL. (appendix 81) In addition, these finances were controlled by the City Committee
of Ankara at center and the Town Committees at towns and countries.
The Soviet Government gave planes as a gift to the Turkish army which would join
the festival flights.184 At the same time, fifty billions red and white papers
symbolizing our flag would be distributed by planes to all over the country for
explaining the significance of the anniversary.
The first article of law 2305 declared that the festival would take three days and the
government offices would be on holiday. Since Ankara was the center of the
Government, the celebrations had to be more impressive than other parts of Turkey.
The city would have guests from other cities and foreign nations. The transportation
costs of two hundred special guests and some participants of parades would be
exceptional.185 Apart from that, the tram company of Istanbul would sell the tickets
with %33 discount.186 In addition, the security precautions of the city prepared in
181 Eke, p.18. 182 Demirhan p. 145. 183 Eke, p.18. 184 Demirhan, p. 146. 185 Eke, p.18. 186 28 Teşrinevvel [October] 1933, Cumhuriyet Newspaper ,p. 6.
92
details and the security powers increase the number of their officials with the
policemen came from İstanbul.
The official documents proved that these security precautions had been experienced
in celebrations before 1933. The written decrees dated 22nd of October, 1930 stated
that 120 policemen came to Ankara from Istanbul. At the same time, 750 scouts of
Istanbul came to Ankara to join the parade in 1930. (appendix 82)
The government had published stamp series especially for the Tenth and Fifteenth
Anniversaries of the Republic and encouraged the society to sending postcards by
making % 50 discounts on the bills of posting and telegraph during festival days.187
Eviatar Zarubavel believes that stamps on specific dates are one of the main official
commemorative rituals marking anniversaries of major historical events in many
countries.188 In that sense, the conceptual frame of the stamps and postcards were
mainly focused on presentations such; the parade of soldiers, the fleet of planes and
the parade of scouts. In addition some metaphors and myths were used to create an
impressive effect on society. The portrait of Atatürk, the war memorials and such
designs presenting the number ‘ten’ like a shining sun are some of the examples of
this symbolism. (fig.3.20)
Fig. 3.20 Stamps, Source: Catalogue of PTT Library.
187 Eke, p. 18. 188 Eviatar Zerubavel, “Calendars and History: A Comparative Study of the Social Organization of National Memory,” in Jeffrey K. Olick (ed.), 2003, States of Memory (Durham and London: Duke University Press), p. 302.
93
3.2.3.2 The Spatial Organizations and the Celebrations at Ankara
It should be suggested that the 10th anniversary of the Foundation of the Turkish
Republic was a good example of an officially recognized ‘mass-producing’
organization. The success of the government in producing masses was obvious as
Ankara’s population had increased to one hundred thousand from eighty thousand
people before the festival began. Not only hotels but also vacant rooms of the family
houses and schools were reserved for visitors. Beside officials, students and foreign
visitors, villagers came to Ankara from rural parts of the country. There were also
foreign journalists who were appointed for reporting the festival. 189
Fig. 3.21 Scouts and citizens waiting in front of the Assembly, 29.10.1933. Source: Ankara Posta Kartları ve Belge Fotoğrafları Arşivi Kataloğu.
The Ankara committee of the Festival had sub-committees which were constituted
according to main activities of celebrations. They were The Program Committee, The
Parade Committee, The Villagers Committee, The Torchlight Procession Committee,
and The Billboard Committee. The director of meetings of these committees was 189 Behnan , p. 3.
94
Governor Nevzat Tandoğan. He was responsible from the arrangements of
Republican Square (Hippodrome) together with the Director of Technical Works,
Fuat Bey.
The festival committee of Ankara organized the spatial arrangements according to
significance of the festival. The public spaces were decorated with materials
symbolizing the Turkish nation. (fig.3.21) The facades of the houses and the
apartments were covered with flags. There were twenty two types of posters and
three hundred mottos designed in red and white colors of national flag. The state
conveyed national messages to public by the sentences written on these posters such;
‘Turkish Nation is a unity that can not be destroyed’, ‘Turkish Military is the essence
of nation’, or ‘The passing ten years of the Republic represents the power of Turk’.190
Fig. 3.22 D.D.Y. Muvakkat Monument, Ankara. Source: Journal of Mimar, 1933.
As the main purpose of the festival was creating the national unity and identity, the
history of the nation became a considerable theme for the decorations. The
190 Behnan, p. 4.
95
commemorative pictures expressing the contrasts between old and new regime and
the figures telling the civilizations of Turkey were some of those designs directly
related with the imagination of the society. 191
Moreover, the usage of symbols and myths for the spatial arrangements interact
directly with the memory of the people. According to Behnan’s notes on the 10th
Anniversary celebrations: “The Republican People’s Party building was decorated
with laurel tree leaves and lightened with lamps with the shape of six arrows. People
who were passing through the street noticed the lamps on the building and honored
with the rosette of six arrows fixed to their collars.”192
The triumphal arches and columns were one of the arrangements peculiar to national
festivals. Although the designers of these arches were various in professions, some
Turkish architects had studied on them. The limitation in time and construction
materials affected most of the projects. According to an essay in Mimar journal,
Architect Bedrettin Hamdi designed the most successful 10th Anniversary work of
Ankara.193 It was a prismatic arch standing over a twenty meters high cube. The
number ten was written on top of it. As it was designed for Directorate of National
Railways, it was located in front of the Ankara Station. Four big maps of railroads in
Turkey were put on the arch which was lightening at night.194 (fig.3.22) Another
‘modernist’ and grand triumphal arch was built at Republic Square (Hippodrome).
The number ten and six principles of Party were written on this arch which was
ornamented by flags.195
The competition for the Hippodrome and Stadium Complex of Ankara had
concluded but the construction of Italian project was not started, yet. However, the
Ankara Municipality had finished the leveling of the site with soil and pebble stones
before the festival began. The tribunes with the capacity of ten thousand persons
were constructed for the spectators of the parade. On the opposite side of these
tribunes the tribunes for President, ministries, ambassadors, foreign visitors, deputies,
war veterans, and officials were built. The press tribunes were near these VIP 191 “Cumhuriyetin Her On Yılı,” October 1999, Belgelerle Türk Tarihi Dergisi Vol. 33, p. 30. 192 Behnan, p. 4. 193 “Onuncu Yıl Tak ve Sütunları,” 1933, Mimar Vol. 11, pp. 352-351. 194 Behnan, p.5. 195 “Cumhuriyetin Her On Yılı,” October 1999, p. 32.
96
tribunes. These temporary tribunes were constructed by timbers and decorated with
cherry laurels, posters, portraits of Atatürk and flags. There was also a radio sound
system for broadcasting a live program to other cities.196 (fig.3.23)
Fig. 3.23 The parade of the sportsmen with bicycles, 29.10.1933. Source: Publications of Ministry of Culture.
There were nearly eighty thousand people at the Republican Square on 29th of
October morning. The participants of parade were arranged in an order at 9 o’clock
at the north side of square. The Commander of Army Corps was responsible from all
participants of parade including soldiers, scouts, students, sportsmen and people.
Atatürk and his comrades had a reception ceremony in front of the Grand National
Assembly at quarter past nine. The radio announced the practices of this reception to
the people waiting for Atatürk at Hippodrome. Then President Atatürk; The Director
of General Staff Fevzi Çakmak; Prime Minister İsmet İnönü; and the guest, Soviet
War Superintendent Police Varalişof arrived to site at 10 o’clock by two
196 Behnan, p.9.
97
automobiles. The citizens were cheering and crying while they were passing the way
through their tribunes.
Fig. 3.24 29.10.1933, Festival of Republic, Hippodrome. Source: The Publications of Ministry of Culture.
Atatürk was the ‘collective body and will’197 of Turkish Republic. As Kertzer
explains, “Rites of new nations often revolve around the image of heroic figure
leading his people to the Promised Land.”198 Here, Atatürk was attracting all the
attention of people on his bodily practices during the celebration. After the National
Anthem, he started his well-known speech on the occasion of the 10th Anniversary of
the Republic at five past eleven. (fig.3.22) He finished his speech with these
sentences:
Turkish Nation!
197 Kusno, p. 103. 198Kertzer, 1988, “The Rites of Power,” p.178.
98
In every decade which passes into eternity, I wholeheartedly wish that you celebrate this great national holiday with ever great honors, happiness, peace and tranquility. Happy is he who says “I am a Turk.”
Everybody listened to this speech in great silence and enthusiasms. Afterwards, the
band played the 10th Anniversary Anthem and people sang the anthem by the help of
papers distributed to them before. 199
The parade began with brass band. The band walked through the tribune of the
President and stopped for a while to salute him. Then, the soldiers of the Fourth
Army Corps marched through the parade way between the tribunes of citizens’ and
VIP tribunes. One hundred army planes were flying over the Hippodrome while the
motorized security powers were passing. There were 4500 scouts, students,
Republican People’s Party members, villagers waiting for their turn. This parade
took one and half hours and finished at thirty five past one p.m. Then, the people
started to leave the Republican Square and walked through the city center. While
they were walking, the radio was broadcasting national songs and people were
singing.
The torchlight procession started at half past eight in the evening after firing 101
artilleries. Then, people stopped walking for one minute silence and factories and
automobiles stroke their horns for ten minutes to show their respect to the martyrs.
The participants of the procession gathered at Hakimiyet-i Milliye Square and
marched through the People’s House. There were officials and soldiers in the
procession; however it was less official than the parade at Hippodrome. The citizens
were carrying torches and singing national anthems while they were walking through
the roads and squares. People celebrated the anniversary until morning at squares,
ballrooms, cinemas and theatres.
There were three official balls at night. The ball at Ankara Palace was one of the
most popular traditions of this festival since the 1920s. The Ministry of Foreign
Affairs had organized a ball for 1929 celebrations. It was so attractive that the
organizers thought that feast should be more professional if the gold gilding dish set
kept by the Directorate of National Palaces at İstanbul had been brought to Ankara.
A written decree was approved for this occasion. (appendix 83)
199 Behnan, p. 15.
99
Atatürk attended the ball at Ankara Palace at two o’clock a.m. The precautions of
security units were very hard in front of the Palace. The people, who were standing
and watching guests of Ball at foreground of Palace, were curtained with cavalry
policemen. (appendix 84) Then the President visited the balls of People’s House and
Military House.
The program of the 30th of October started with commemorating the martyrs of
Independence War at Cebeci Sakarya Monument. The Public and Orator Podiums
were one of the most important activities of the program.(fig. 3.25) Every citizen
who made an application to the register book could tell his/her feelings and
memorials in these podiums from nine o’clock to seventeen o’clock. They were
constructed in front of the monument at Hakimiyet-i Milliye Square, Samanpazarı
Park, and Hamamönü Square. Ziraat Institution, Numune Hospital Pavilion, many
exhibitions and movies were opened on the second day of festival. In addition, the
people entertained in the streets and squares by listening folk songs and dancing in
traditional patterns like sinsin, misket, köroğlu, zeybek. There were also traditional
Cirit games at Station and Cebeci Squares.
Fig. 3.25 The Public Podium at Hakimiyet-i Miliye Square, Ankara; 29.10.1935. Source: The Journal of Ülkü.
100
The Soil Ceremony was performed on the third day of the festival. It was an
invention of the organizers of the 10th Anniversary celebrations. The ceremony
started with a procession in front of the Public House at 10 o’clock in the morning.
Five thousand people walked through the roads of Samanpazarı, Hakimiyeti Milliye
Square, and arrived to Republican Square. While the students were carrying the signs
in the shape of numbers 1923 and 1933, one hundred Zeybek were singing the
Ankara Anthem. Meanwhile, the soldiers were carrying the huge portrait of Atatürk.
The four meters high statue of Atatürk was being carried by a lorry. Some symbolic
objects signifying the Independence War, martyrs, modernization, reforms,
industrialization, piece pacts, and Republican regime were taken part in the parade.
The Director of Department of Religious Affairs, the Governor of Ankara, the
Director of Public Houses, a mother of a martyr, a ghazi, a girl and a boy took soil by
their hands and covered it with Turkish flags for presenting them to Atatürk. This
practice signified the gratitude of Turkish people to Atatürk and their national
promise for the permanence of the national unity and solidarity. After the speeches of
some officials, the ceremony ended with anthem of the 10th Year Anniversary at two
o’clock. The celebrations continued at Public Houses and streets until the morning.
Fig. 3.26 The first celebration at Hippodrome after the construction, 29.10.1936. Source: The Journal of Karınca Kooperatif.
101
The tradition of celebrating national festivals at Hippodrome began with the Tenth
Anniversary of the Republic. Although the quality of space as a Republican Square
was not sufficient, the success of the organization transformed the significance of the
Horse Race Site in the memory of society.
102
CHAPTER 4
CONCLUSION
This study on the national celebrations at Hippodrome of Ankara intended to explore
the effects of the interaction between social memory and space for the nation-
construction process of Early Republican Period. In order to begin our research, we
have briefly unfolded the aspects of nationalism throughout the studies of the critics
who considered nation as a movement and creation. Then, we consider that the
constitution of the Turkish national identity and unity was the main point of the
national state and underlined in many occasions during the Early Republican Period.
The new Republican regime aimed at cutting its relations with Ottoman Empire and
caliphate by redefining the society. Although there had been some nationalistic
movements before the new regime, the projects of this period tried to constitute a
new type of citizen and a new type of culture through the ideology of a new nation-
state.
To begin our research, we defined Turkish case of nationalism by the conceptions of
Hobsbawn and Anderson. These two critics improve their studies through the
concretizing the abstractions of nationalism. Moreover, they emphasized the
importance of meaning and representation in order to inculcate the concept of nation-
ness into the society. We have studied the Hobsbawm’s contribution in regarding
nation as a creation and construction of cultural engineers. They design symbols,
mythologies, histories and organize national festivals, sporting contests and the like
which are entitled with the term ‘invented tradition’. Apart from that, we have
mentioned the definitions of Anderson on the modern cultural artifacts that depend
on the imagination of the people. He considered that the modern conditions of the
age provisioned the imagined nation into existence.
As Hobsbawn and Anderson mentioned the need for the continuity of the nation and
the agents that supply the consciousness and sensitivity for the nation, the collective
and mass consumed practices were taken into consideration. It was certain that social
memory and its representations were unavoidable issues for the nation-construction
process. Therefore Connerton’s studies on the commemorational ceremonies and
103
bodily performances were put on the nationalistic agenda as a dimension of social
memory. We examined that social memory of the Turkish nation was constructed in
parallel with nation-building projects and an active component of the politics.
It is only after that, we realize how national festivals at Hippodrome located in the
structure of society and in the frame of the capital city. At first, we have regarded
Hippodrome as an important aspect of the development plan of Ankara. Thus, we
mentioned the projects for the construction of the city through the nationalist
purposes of the new regime and unfolded the elements that were effective in this
creation. It is certain that Ankara was regarded as the center of the government and
had fully political character. It would be a model for other cities of the country so it
had to preserve the elements that represented the social, cultural and political
dynamics of the nation. Furthermore the technical achievements of the building
process had a political character, since they were considered as the success of the
new regime and modernization projects.
Secondly, we have unfolded that the construction of Hippodrome was not only
related with the commemorational ceremonies. The horse races were a regular social
activity for the people and the politicians. Although the spatial arrangements had not
been sufficient, the existence of national elements and political features directed the
improvement of the site and popularized the horse races as a part of social
transformation and modernization.
In addition, sport activities had been invented as a representation of political power
in European nations and also in Turkey before 1930s. They provided the combination
of social and political traditions. We have unfolded that, the intuitions and statesmen
of Turkey aimed to create the new kind of citizen which was an image of hygienic
society and they fully support the construction of sport sites which could constitute
the medium for these national purposes. Thus, the development plan of the capital
city included sport areas which were a model for the other cities of Turkey. The
politicians brought front their ideas about constructing a grand sport complex in
Ankara which would represent our nation successfully in international milieu. In this
respect, the construction of Hippodrome was not contemplated alone, rather it was
considered as a part of a sport complex.
104
Thirdly, we have realized that the interaction between space and performances of the
national celebrations emerged a need for a public space where the program of the
festivals could be performed effectively. An idea of festival place and a sport
complex including a parade way had been mentioned in the revision projects of
development plans of Ankara. However, it was interesting that the construction of
such sport complex began with the need for a site for official parades.
Then, we have examined the construction of Hippodrome and realized that the
project was achieved despite the technical and financial disabilities. The important
point is that, the design and construction processes of the site were under the control
of government and legitimized by laws. We observe that, the developments in the
organization of national festivals suggested the importance of Hippodrome for
commemorational performances. Therefore, our argument was based on the case
that, the significance of the Hippodrome was not arisen in time, rather the
construction of Hippodrome had some national meanings and the nation-state
insisted on constructing it in order to represent its existence to society and create
national unity.
After analyzing the Hippodrome case as an outcome of the construction of the new
capital city and purposes of the new regime, our concern in the rest of the research
was through unfolding the structure of national festivals. It is certain that, national
festivals of Turkey are the invention of political regime to concretize the abstractions
of nationalism. The national festivals shelter the representations of social memory
and locate them in the society’s imagination by its performative, operative and
legitimized constitution. We realize that the political character of national festivals is
combined with the social production of the nation and this politicization structure
collectively consumed celebrations. Meanwhile, the space presents a frame for this
arrangement with its materialistic existence. Moreover, the symbolic and ritualistic
aspects of the festivals conquer the imagination of the society in time and the re-
enactment of the activities at regular times at specific site constitutes a social
memory for a space.
Hence, we examine the celebration of the 10th Anniversary of Foundation of
Republic to unfold the beginning of the formation of social memory for Hippodrome
case. Our research makes clear that, the most important aspect of the national
festivals is the program which reveals organization of time, space, performers and
105
spectator. The organization needs an institutional back-up which prepares the
medium of the festival by inventing, materializing and popularizing the values that
the power aimed to inculcate into society.
Considering all points of view, this study on the national festivals of Early
Republican period at Hippodrome is an intension for exploring how social memory
creates the society and how the society makes the social memory. In this concept, the
national meanings of the festivals and the Hippodrome are considered as both
productive outcomes of construction of memory. However, we realize that memory
is an active fact that continually re-made new values and serve new structures. Thus,
this study should be examined by unfolding the transformations in the political and
social structure of Turkish nation and its effects on national festivals at Hippodrome
after Early Republican Period.
106
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 0.0.1924, Unpublished Official Document, no:272..0.0.80.3.8..11., (in Ottoman Arabic Alphabet), transcribed by Mustafa Gençoğlu. Original text is as: Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Mübadele [takas], İmar ve İskan Vekaleti [antet] Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nin makarr-ı idaresi [hükümet merkezi] olan Ankara şehrinin bir an evvel, bi’l cümle vesâit-i medeniyeye mâlik bir ma’mure olması Cumhuriyet için mesâil’i [meseleler] müsta’cileden [acil olan] ve mesâil-i esâsiyedendir. Heyet-i Vekile bu hususta mutâbıktır. Maksadı istihsâl [üretmek, meydana getirmek] için şimdiye kadar görüşülmüş nukâdın [noktaların] hâl-i hazırıyla yapılacak mevâdın imkan-ı tahakkuku hakkında ale’l-müfredât ber-vechi-âti [aşağıda] arz-ı ma’lumât ediyorum. 340 sene-i mâliyesi bidâyetinde işe başlayabilmek için âtide [gelecekde] şerh [açımlama,yorumlama] olunan umûmi planı müstacilen tesbit etmeye lüzum vardır. Ankara için düşünülen umûmi plan ber-vechi-âtidir. Appendix 2 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 0.0.1924, Unpublished Official Document, no:272..0.0.80.3.8..11., (in Ottoman Arabic Alphabet), transcribed by Mustafa Gençoğlu. The original text is as: 1) Ankara Şehremaneti Kânunu Dahiliye Vekâletinde ihzar [hazır] olunmuş gibidir. Kânun-
i sâni [ocak ayı] haftasına kadar bu muâmeleyi herhalde bitireceğiz. Emanet başmühendisi yeni şehirler tertibât ve te’sisâtında mütehassıs bir ecnebi mühendisi Ankara Şehremânetine merbût [bağlı] olarak istihdâm olunacaktır. Bu mütehassıs devletçe düşünülen ecnebi mütehassıslar meyânında hesap ve ücreti devlet bütçesinden olunması düşünülüyor.
2) Ankara Planı: Nâfia Vekili Muhtar Beyefendi riyâsetinde bir encümen ihzâr etmektedir. Bu plan şehrin te’sisât ve inşaat-i müsta’cilesini te’min edecek surette Kânun-i sâni bidâyetinde [başlangıç] hazırdır. Eski plan mayıs nihayetine kadar bir müteşebbis Keşfiyât Kumpanyası tarafından deruhte [üstüne almak] olunmak üzere muamelesi ikmal edilmiştir. Belediyenin tasdikine mütevakkıftır. Bu muamelenin Kânun-i sâni bidâyetine kadar ikmal ettirilmesi Dâhiliye Vekâlet-i Celilesinden rica olunur.
3) Lağım: Lağım tasavvurâtının [tasavvurlar] mükemmel plan üzerinde Keşfiyât Kumpanyası tarafından tesbit olunması mukerrerdir [kararlaştırma]. Lağımın bi’l-fiil inşaatı Şehremaneti tarafından vücuda getirilecektir.
4) Su Tedârik ve Tevzi [dağıtım]: Evkaf Vekâleti Ankara’nın su ihtiyacını tesviyeye talib ve müteşebbistir. Teşebbüsün katiyyet kesbetmesi, Şehremâneti teşkilatına ve ondan da mühim olarak Evkaf Vekâleti’nin İstanbul Tepebaşı Bahçesi hakkındaki muâmele-i maliyesinin İstanbul Belediyesi tarafından katiyet kesbetmesine mütevakkıftır. Dâhiliye Vekâletinden bu muamelenin Kânun-i sâni bidâyetine kadar behemahal [kesinlikle] intâc [netice vermek] ettirilmesi bi’l-hassa rica olunur.
5) Elektrik: Şehrin elektrik tenviri [aydınlatma] medeni hayat için müsta’cil ve elzemdir. Nihayet Mart’ta elektrik teşebbüsâtının katiyet ile faaliyat sahasina girmesi matlûbdur. Bütün şehrin asrî ve medenî usulde elektrik ihtiyacının temini için ecnebi sermayeli bir şirketin davet ve teşebbüsüne imkan daima aranılmalı ve temin olunmalıdır. Bu esasa halel gelmemek üzere müsta’cil teşebbüs olarak Dâhiliye Vekâleti’nin icraatı bir an evvel intac olunmalıdır. Heyet-i Vekilenin bu babta surat-i tenvîri bi’l-hassa rica olunur.
6) Mesakin [konutlar] ve Mebâni [binalar]İnşaatı: 340 Mart bidâyetinden itibaren mesâkin inşaatına herhalde başlamak lazımdır.
107
a) Bu hususta birinci sağlam müteşebbis Evkaf Vekâletidir. Tepebaşı satış muamelesi intâc olunduğu halde Vekâlet-i müşârun [işaretle gösterilen] ileyhâ beş yüz bin liralık bir sermaye ile plana tevfîkan [uyarak] mesâkin inşaatına martta başlayabilecektir. Bu münasebetle dördüncü maddeye müteferri (?) rica Dâhiliye Vekâlet-i Celilesi nezdinde tekrar te’yid olunur.
b) Hususi sermaye ile mebâni inşaatı için hiçbir fırsat ve suhûlet [kolaylık] fevt [kaybetme]olunmamaktadır ve olunmamalıdır. Şimdiye kadar müracaat edenlerden birisi Reşid Apaz (?) ve şürekasının bir buçuk milyon liralık inşaat teklifleridir. Bu teklif elyevm Maliye Vekâlet-i Celilesindedir. Mebâni inşa edilecek arazinin takriben yüzde seksen beşine mutasarrıf olan Evkaf Vekâleti bu mesele ile doğrudan doğruya alakadar görümektedir. Binâenaleyh cihet-i maliyesi hakkında mutâlaat-ı lazımesiyle beraber Maliye Vekâletinin süratle Evkaf Vekâlet-i Celilesini de alakadar etmiş ve teklif müsta’cilen bir şekl-i ameli ve tatbiki verilmesi Maliye ve Evkâf vekâletlerinden bi’l-hassa rica olunur.
c) Bir Fransız şirketi Evkaf ile mebâni inşaatı nokta-i nazarından muzâkerededir. Fakat Fransızların umûmi bir siyâset-i maliye icabı olarak Frank ikrâz [borç verme] ve Frank istifa etmek esasında musırr [ısrarcı] olmaları şimdilik müzakerelerin neticelenmesine mani görünmektedir. Fransızlar ve İtalyanlar ve ihtimalen diğer milletler kendi paralarının rayicini muhafaza ve i’lâ [yükseltmek] için böyle bir siyaset-i maliyede ısrar edeceklerinden Mâliye ve Evkaf Vekaletlerinin bu hususta serian [çabukça] karar vererek bi’l-cümle teşebbüsât-ı mâliye ve iktisâdiyede hükümetimize bir esas-ı vahid [yalnız] tayinine süratle delâlet [yol gösterme, aracılık] ve teklifâtta bulunmaları rica olunur.
d) İsviçreli Kanbamos (?)Şirketi de bir mahalle inşaatı için “Teklif ve hakk-ı hıyâre” intizâr [beklemek] etmektedir. Şirket-i mezkure [adı geçen] ile Nafia ve Evkaf vekâletlerinin temasta bulunarak İsviçre sermayesiyle mebani inşaatı yapılıp yapılmayacağını bir an evvel karara iktiran ettirilmelerini rica ederim.
7) Sokak: En çok paraya ihtiyaç gösteren sokak masârıfı gerçi Şehremanetine aittir. Fakat şehir bir an evvel, asgari surette tahdid edilmek için bir iki ana caddenin olsun 340’da bi’t-tanzim ve tesviyesi zaruridir. Bundan maada şehrin mütemmimât [tamamlayan,bitiren] ceremesinden olan Çankaya ve Keçiören gibi kubûr (?) muvasalasını [ulaşım yolu] kısmen Nâfia büdçesinden mükemmelen temin elzemdir. Nâfia Vekâlet-i Celilesinin bu babda amelî tekalif-i müsta’cilesine intizar olunur.
8) Vesâit-i Nakliye: Şehirde bir tramvay tesisini Nâfia Vekâleti temin etmeye çalışacaktır. Şehrin kubur (?) otobüs muvasalası marta kadar bir surette temin edilmesi daha müstacil mahiyettedir. Dahiliye ve Nâfia vekâletlerinin bunu temin için teşebbüsât ve teşvikâtda bulunmaları rica olunur.
9) Telefon: Ankara’nın telefon ihtiyacı hiç olmazsa şimdilik Telgraf ve Telefon Müdüriyet-i Umûmiyesi tarafından temin olunacaktır. İhtiyaç meyanında resmi ihtiyaç ile mebâni-i hususiye aboneleri aynı zamanda ve müsta’cilen derpîş [göz önünde tıtmak] edilmelidir.
10) Bir fâiz-i [amaca erme] mu’tedil [uygun] ile Ankara Şehremanetine 340 bütçesinden altı yüz bin lira kadar bir para ikrazı zarûridir.
Appendix 3 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 08.03.1925, Unpublished Official Document, no:030.10.138.931.1. (in Ottoman Arabic Alphabet), transcribed by Mustafa Gençoğlu. Original text is as: Maarif Vekaleti (mühür, antet) Başvekâlet-i Celileye, Merkez-i cumhuriyetimiz olan Ankara’da bu sene zarfında mebâni-i âliyenin inşası mukarrer olduğu makâmât-ı [makamlar] resmiye ilanlarında görülmektedir. Yeni tesis edilen merkez-i hükümetin manzara-i umûmiyesine bediî [güzel] bir şekil verebilmek ileride yapılacak mebani-i aliyenin rastgele bir üslub-ı mimariye terk edilmeyip inşaat-ı cedidenin dikkat ve itina ile vücuda getirilmesine vâbestedir [bağlı]. Yeni Vekâlet saraylarıyla Şehremâneti tarafından inşa kılınacak mebâninin zevk-i millimizi okşayacak bir tarzda inşa edilerek şehirlerimize muhteşem ve aynı zamanda milli bir manzara verebilmesini temin için gerek
108
vekâletlerin ve gerek Ankara Şehremâneti tarafından yaptırılacak mebâni-i resmiye vesâir inşaat proje ve planlarının milli harsımız nokta-i nazarından kab-el-inşa bir kere de Hars [kültür] dairesinde tedkik eildikten sonra tatbikata başlanılması hususu hakkında Vekâlet-i âlisini Hars İdâresine îrsali [gönderme] mukteziye ifa-yı rica olunur efendim. Maarif Vekili Appendix 4 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, Unpublished Official Document, no:03010.138.931.1. (in Ottoman Arabic Alphabet), transcribed by Mustafa Gençoğlu. Original text is as: Bi’l-umum Vekâletlerin, Maârif Vekâlet-i Celilesinden murûd (?) 08.03.1341[1925] tarih ve 1989.316 numrolu tezkerede, merkez-i Cumhuriyetimiz olan Ankara’da, bu sene inşası mukarrer mebâni-i âliye meyânında yeni vekâlet saraylarıyla Şehremâneti tarafından kılınacak mebâninin zevk-i millimizi okşayacak bir tarzda inşası (?) şehrimize muhteşem ve aynı zamanda milli bir manzara verebilmesini temin için gerek vekâletler ve gerek Ankara Şehremâneti tarafından yaptırılacak mebâni-i resmiye ve inşaat-ı sâire proje ve planlarının milli harsımız nokta-i nazarından kabl’el- inşa bir kere de Hars dairesinde tedkikâtı için Hars Dairesi’ne irsali rica (?) Vekâlet-i müşârün ileyhâmıza (?) Keyfiyet bi’l-umum vekâletlere ve Erkân-ı Umûmiye (?) yazılmıştır. Başvekil Appendix 5 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 19.03.341 [1925] Unpublished Official Document, no:03010.138.931.1. (in Ottoman Arabic Alphabet), transcribed by Mustafa Gençoğlu. Original text is as: Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Nâfia Vekâleti Kalem-i Mahsus Müdiriyeti (antet) Başvekâlet-i Celileye, Şerefvârid olan 17 Mart 341 [1925] tarihli ve 6.1339 numrolu tezkere-i sâmiye-i vekâletpenâhileri cevabıdır. Nâfiaya aid mebânî-i inşaat projeleri Mühendis Mektebi’nden yetişen mühendisler tarafından yapılagelmektedir. Milli devletimize ve harsımıza aid ciheti yine Mühendis Mektebi’nde görülmekte ve Sanayi-i Nefise Mektebi’nden yetişmiş talebeye mimari tezyinâtına [süsleme] müteallik [ilgili, bağlı] hususda yine Mühendis Mektebi muallimleri tarafından tedris [ders verme] olunmakta bulunmasına göre Nâfia Mebâni-i resmiye ve İnşaat-ı sâiresi proje ve planlarının Hars İdaresine gönderilmesi hususunun Nâfia için hâcet [ihtiyaç] olmadığı mütelaasında bulunduğunu arz eylerim efendim. Nafia Vekili Appendix 6 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 1.1.1923, Unpublished Official Document, no:30..10.0.0.146.43.2 (in Ottoman Arabic Alphabet), transcribed by Mustafa Gençoğlu. Original text is as: İstanbul’da Adnan Beyefendi’ye, Ankara’da rakz olunacak zafer abideleri içün İstanbul’da da bir komite teşkil edilerek faaileyette bulunmasını himmetinizden bekliyoruz. Halide Hanımefendi’nin de orada bulunması bu meselede tabi’i fevkalede müessir[etkili] olacaktır. Matbu’at[basılı yayın] ile de tevhi-i faaliyet edilerek edibler ve sanaat’kârlar vesair münasib göreceğiniz zevattan teşkil edilecek bu komitenin az zamanda bütün İstanbul’u harekete getireceğine eminiz. Buradaki heyet-i umumiyede orada teşkil edeceğiniz komiteye vali vekili Es’ad Bey oğlu mutasarrıfı Asım, Üsküdâr mutasarrıfı Halil Bey’ler ile Besim Ömer Paşa ve Celal Muhtar bey gibi zevatın da idhali münasib komisyonda icra-yı icabı (…) layık olduğu ehemniyeti vereceğinize bütün arkadaşlara kani’ olduğumu hepimizin selam ve ihtiramlarımızı arz ederim.
109
Fi 1 Kanun-i Sani 339 Zafer Abidesi Heyet-i Umumiye Reisi ve Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi Reis-i Sanisi (imza) Appendix 7
Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 01.07.1928, Unpublished Official Document, no:030.10...144.36.6., (in Ottoman Arabic Alphabet), transcribed by Mustafa Gençoğlu. Original text is as: Telgrafnâme, Adres: Ankara Baş Vekili İsmet Paşa Hazretlerine, Allah’ın inâyetiyle [iyilik] büyüklerimizin teveccühlerine güvenerek beynelminel ma’rekeye atılıyoruz. Omuzlarımızdaki yükün kıymeti (?) takdir etmeliyiz. İyi nazarlarınızı ve hayırlı temenniyâtınızı üzerimizden eksik etmemenizi istirham eder ve arz-ı tazîmât mahsussı eyleriz efendim hazretleri. Türkiye Olimpiyad Kafilesi, (?) Burhaneddin
Appendix 8
Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 14-15.06.1925, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.11.1.15.27.17., (in Ottoman Arabic Alphabet), transcribed by officials of Archive, Original text is as: Türkiye Reisicumhuru Dâhiliyye Vekâlet-i Umur-ı Mahalliyye Müdiriyyet-i UmumiyyesiBaşvekâlet-i Celileye Tayyare Cemiyyeti namına Ankara’da icra olunacak at koşusu masrafına verilmek üzere Ziraat Vekâleti Celilesi hesabına Mal Sandığı’ndan ita [verilen] olunan ikibin liranın vâridât büdcesinin “at koşusu hesabına Ziraat Vekâleti’nden muaveneten virilen” nâmıyle keza yeniden açılacak beşinci faslına terkim ve ilâvesi hakkında Ankara Vilâyeti Encümen mazbatası üzerine tanzim olunan kararnâmenin bera-yı tasdik takdim kılındığı arz olunur efendim. Dâhiliye Vekili, M. Cemil [Uybadin] Appendix 9 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 19.04.1927, Unpublished Official Document, no:030.10...144.35.15 (in Ottoman Arabic Alphabet), transcribed by Mustafa Gençoğlu. Original text is as: Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Erkan-ı Harbiye Umumiye Riyaseti, Talim ve Terbiye Dairesi, 3.Şube, İstanbul [antet] Başvekâlet-i Celîliyyeye, Ankara’da İstasyon ile Evkaf Mahallesi arasındaki padokta [at yarışı çim sahası] Muavenet-i Askeriye ile Şehremanetinin de iştirakiyle bir spor sahasının tesviye edilmekte olduğu mâ’lûm-u devletleridir. Ancak Türkiye’nin aynı zamanda Spor ve Terbiye-i Bedeniye Merkezi olması lazım gelen Ankara’da bu suretle yapılacak olan sade bir saha maksadı teminden uzaktır. Bu sahanın yanında her türlü asrî vesaiti [aracı] havi [toplayan] diğer Spor ve Terbiye-i Bedeniye müessesâtına [kuruluş] ihtiyaç vardır. Mâruz şekilde bir stad Türkiye’nin muazzam bir terbiye-i bedeniye merkezi ve mektebi olur. Merkez-i Hükümet’de yapılacak böyle bir stad ile tevhid edilmiş muazzam bir Terbiye-i Bedeniye Mektebi Ankara’nın mutlaka merkezi bir yerinde olmak mecburiyetindedir. Burası da salâhiyatdâr [yetkili] mütehassısların müttehiden [birlikte] bana bildirdiklerine göre Parkın bulunduğu yerdir. Mesmûâta nazaran Maarif Vekâlet-i Celîlesi 1927 sene bütçesinden Ankara’da bir terbiye-i bedeniye mektebi tesisi için 70 000 lira tahsis etmiştir. Ve bu mühim parayla Cebeci’de bir terbiye-i bedeniye mektebi vücuda getirmek arzusundadır. Bundan başka Müdafaa-i Milliye Vekâlet-i Celîlesi de 1927 senesi bütçesine Ordu Spor Teşkilât ve mâlazımesinin [malzeme] ikmâl ve takviyesi için 70 000 lira koymuştur. Bu yetmiş bin liranın takriben ve a’zami otuz bin lirasının kolorduların ve askeri mekteplerin ispor ve mâlazime ihtiyaçlarına tahsisinden sonra mütebâki kırk bin lira ile Ankara’da bir askeri terbiye-i bedeniye mektebi veya salonu inşası imkanı teemmül [etraflıca düşünmek]
110
edilmekte idi. Diğer taraftan Ankara şehrine bir stadyum bahşetmek mecburiyet-i maddiye ve maneviyesinde bulunan Ankara Şehremâneti de bunun için 1926 mâli senesinin bakıyesi için 5000 lira ve 1927 mâli senesinden itibaren de on senede sarf edilmek üzere 700 000 lira tahsis etmiş veya etmeyi düşünmektedir. Eğer bu arzular ve bu paralar esasta aynı olması lazımken bir maksad-ı umûminin lehinde ve müttehid bir program ile bir yerde teksîf edilmezler ise dağılacak olan kuvvetlerin ayrı ayrı yalnız noksan neticeler verecekleri ve matlûb olan mükemmel eserin vücud bulmayacağı âşikardır. Halbuki Müdefaa-i Milliye ve Maarif Vekâlet-i Celîliyeleri ile Ankara Şehremâneti Ankara için müşterek bir program tanzim ederek muayyen [kararlaştırılmış] bir maksad uğrunda vâsıtalarını teksîf buyurdukları takdirde Ankara Parkı’nda merkez-i hükümete cidden lâyık-ı muazzam bir spor ve terbiye-i bedeniye mektebinin ve stadyumunun vücuda getirilmesi imkan altına girmiş olur. Ve aynı şeylerin bir şehrin muhtelif yerlerinde noksan bir surette tekerrür-ü te’sis gibi bir israfa da meydan bırakmamış olur. Çünki bir terbiye-i bedeniye mektebi bir sahaya muhtaç olunduğu gibi bir saha muhtelif terbiye-i bedeniye müesseselerine muhtaçtır. Ve bütün bu tekâsüf-i [yoğunlaşma] te’sisât Cebeci gibi Ankara’nın bir kenarında olmaktan ziyade her gün ve her zaman bütün gençlerin pek kolayca ve hiçbir nakil vasıtasına ihtiyaç hissetmeksizin hiçbir külfetsiz gidebilecekleri ve devam edebilecekleri Ankara Parkı’nda vücuda gelmek mecburiyetindedir. Bundan başka güzel bir plan dâiresinde ve parkın zengin ağaçları ve zarif tarhları arasında vücuda getirilecek saha ile muhtelif terbiye-i bedeniye ve spor binaları Ankara şehrinin İstasyon cihetindeki medhalinde [başlangıç, giriş yeri] şehir için en güzel bir ziynet makamına da kâim olacaktır. İstasyon-Ankara Caddesi’nin şark kenarı boyunca muntazam ve müttehid [birleşmiş] bir plan dairesinde vücuda getirilecek olan bu muazzam müessese aynı zamanda dahil ve harice karşı devlet ve milletimizin kuvve-i hayatiyesini en canlı bir surette temsile müsaittir. Örfümüzün takviyesi emrinde kuvvetlerin tevhidiyle mefturûn bu mülâhazâtın Başvekâlet-i Celiliyyece makbul görülmesi halinde icabının tesrî-i ifasına müsaade-i devletlerini ehemmiyetle arz ve istirham ederim efendim. Erkan-ı Harbîye-i Umûmiye Reisi, Reşid [?] Sûret-i tebelluğ: Başvekâlet-i Celileye Müdefaa-i Milliye, Maarif ve Dahiliye Vekâlet-i Celilelerine arz edilmiş ve bir sûreti Riyâset-i Sanîye’ye gönderilmiştir. Takdim .21. Appendix 10 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 09.03.1929, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.10. .122.867.2.101-24., p 2. Original text is as: Berlin Mühendis Mektebi Alisi müderrislerinden Prof. Dr. H.c. Herman Jansen’in Ankara şehri imar projesi izahnamesinin almancadan tercümesi: (…) Mukaddime. Merkezi hükûmetin şekli bir milletin his ve düşüncesinin temsalidir. Büyük bir imar fikri le bunun görülecek tarzda vücüde kertilmesi lâzımdır. Dünyanın merkez hükûmetlerinden enderi Ankara gibi böyle bir imarın terakki ve tatbikine müsait, bütü şehir şeklinde hakim yere malikdirler. Kale-ye bir harabe yığını olarak bila isitifade büyük masraflar ihtiyariyle gelecek nesillere için muhafaza edilecek veyahut- gerek kulturel ve gerekse siyasi olsun- milli hayatın merkezine baz teşkil ettirilecektir. Böyle bir inşaatla Türkiya mevcut asarı hasebiyle (Romada Kapitol, Pergamondaki Kasır v.s.) her kesce taktir edilen milletler meyanına girecektir. (…) Appendix 11 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 09.03.1929, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.10..122.867.2.101-24., p. 10. Original text is as:
111
Stadion ve At Koşu Mahalli için Şehremaneti tarafından işaret edilen saha, mühat [sıvışık] olması hasebiyle hem bu maksada çok elverişli hemde gerek vesaiti nakliye ve gerekse yayan gidenler için turuku [yollar] münakalanın kolayca tesisi mümkün olması yüzünden muafıktır. Stadion Berlinde olduğu gibi at koşu pistinin içine konulmuştur. Stadiyona giden yollar esas pistin altından geçecektir. Stadiyona ilaveten Terbiyei Bedeniye Mektebi Alisi, Askeri Spor Mektebi ve bu gibi müessiseler yapılmalıdır. Stadyonunu yanındaki sahaya muhtelif spor talim mahalleri yapılmalıdır. Stadiyon ve at koşu mahallinin bütün tesisatı bilhassa dikkatle işlenmiştir. Appendix 12 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 14.02.1930, Unpublished Official Document. The original text is as: TC. Ankara Şehri İmar Müdürlüğü [antet] T.C. Ankara Şehri İmar Müdürlüğüne, Ankara Yenişehir 1 Şubat 30 tarihinde irsal olunan lutufnamenizde koşu stadyum mahalli için zikredilen güçlükleri ref eden yeni teklif projesini leffen gönderiyorum.
1. Koşu mahalli yeni teklifte şimali garbi cihetinden Şehremanetine ait eraziye tecavüz etmemektedir.
2. İşbu yeni teklif projemin şimali şarki cihetinden Bent deresine müsadif olmasıyle ne kadar tulde mezhur dere güzergâhının tebdili lâzım geleceği hakkında yanımda vesaiki lazımenin bulunmaması dolayısıyla bir fikir dermiyan edemezsemde 28 Kanunisani 1930 tarihli tarafınızdan gönderilen iki numaralı teklifte aynı mahalde istidayonu göstermiş olmanızdan bu müşkülatın sizcede şayanı ehemniyet olmadığını zan etmekteyim.
3. Bent deresinden ayrılan kanal yeni proje dahiline tesadüf etmemektedir. İzhar edilen arzular üzerine koşu mahallinin istasyona yaklaşmasına muvafakat edebilirsemde bunun için istasyon ile İstanbul Caddesi Askeri Fişenk fabrikaları arasında yeni projemde lûzum gördüğüm caddelerin küşadı zaruridir.
Koşu mahalli ile stadyom arasında mukaddema [önceden] tasavvur edilen caddenin ilkasına yeni projemde imkan görmüyorum. Esasen bu cadde, küşadı için yapılacak masraf kadar faide temin etmeyecekti. Mamafi anın yerine koşu mahalli ile istasyon arasında ve demir yolu güzergahında bulunacak sanayi mıntıkasının istifade edebileceği A, C, G caddeleri tasavvur edilmiştir. CD, EF tahtani geçitlerinden AB tahtani geçitine de ihtiyaç gözüküp gözükmeyeceği ancak mahalli tetkikat neticesinde tayin edebilir. Müsabaka planında gösterilmiş olan FBD caddesi bu plânda da aynen ibka edilmiştir. Salhane hakkında: Salhane için yene 2600 numaralı plânda D mevkiinde gösterilen erazi, mesakin mıntıkalarından da uzak olması itibariyle muvafık görülmüştür. Efendim.
Hörmetkârınız, Yansen Appendix 13 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 26.01.1931, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.10..171.187.16. T.C.Şurayı Devlet Hey’eti Umumiyesi, no: 322.4 [antet] (…) Ankara’nın Akköprü mevkiinde kâin olup 3 Eylül 1927 tarihli ikinci sınıf Teşvikisanayı muafiyet ruhsatnamesini haiz olan ve 30 Nisan 1930 tarihinde iktisadiyesi kabul olunan Çini fabrikasının (…) Şûrayı devlet reisi ve azalar (imzalar) Appendix 14 Office of Prime Minister Republic Archive, 15 February 1930, Unpublished Official Report, no:
112
T.C. Ankara Vilayeti Tahrirat, 1.87 Yarış ve Islâh Encümeni Riyaseti Celilesi’ne
1. Ankara’da tesis edilmekte olan yarış yerinin pek yakında tanzimine başlanacağı malumu devletleridir. Her sene Cumhuriyet bayramında yapılmakta olan resmi geçidin, Devlet Erkânı, Meb’uslar ve Memurlarla aileleri tarafından görünebilmesi için Büyük Millet Meclisi binası önünde ve karşısında Şehremaneti tarafından Tribünler yapılmakta idi. Bu sene ise tribünlerin daha esaslı bir şekilde yapılabilmesi için Şehremanetinin mali vaziyeti dolayısıyla yardım olarak Vilayet bütçesine 30000 lira tahsisat vazedilmiştir. Kezalik her sene yapılmakta olan ve alelade salaş binalarda teşekkül eden Hayvan sergisi için de bir çok para sarfolunmaktadır. Bu tesisatında bu sene daha iyi bir şekilde yapılabilmesi için Vilayet bütçesine 10000 lira tahsisat konulmuştur. Cumhuriyet bayramında geçit resminin Meclis önünde icrası bir çok halkın bunu görebilmesine imkan bırakmamakta ve bizzarur en büyük bayram günümüzde yapılan bir merasimle daha yakından alâkadar olamamaktadır. Resmi geçidin çok esaslı ve pek çok kişiyi istiap edebilecek şekilde tesis edilmekte olan yarış sahasında icrasının bunun daha intizamlı olmasını ve hemen bütün halkın da görebilmesini temin edeceği düşünülmektedir. Aynı zamanda hayvan sergisinin de esaslı tesisatla bu sahede yapılması her sene bir çok paranın ziyanına meydan vermeyeceği gibi Memleket için çok faideli ve ümitli neticeler veren bu serginin iyi bir şekilde olmasını mümkün kılacaktır. Bu maruzatın zatı Riyasetpenahilerince de tecviz buyrulduğu takdirde Tribünler ve hayvan sergisi için bütçeye mevzu 40000 lira Yarış ve Islâh Encümeni’ne takdim edilecektir. Keyfiyetin tetkikikle muktezasının ifa ve iş’arına müsaadei Vekâletpenahilerini arz ve istirham eylerim efendim.
2. Yarış ve Islâh Encümeni Riyasetine ve malumaten Dahiliye Vekâletlerine arz edilmiştir.
Vali Nevzat [imza] Appendix 15 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 25.02.1930, Unpublished Official Document, no: 30.18.1.2..8.10..13. Original text is as: Müdüriyeti Aliyyeye, H: Stadyom ve yarış yeri: Stadyom ve yarış yerine ait 2600 numaralı plân 20 Şubat .30 tarihinde profesöy Yansenden geldi. (…) bu defa taktim kılınan plân, İmar müdürlüğü ile profesör Yansen arasında cereyan eden muhabere ve müzakerenin bir neticesidir. (…) bu plan münasebetiyle gerek stadyom ve gerekse zahire bursasiyle mezbaha terlerininde vaziyeti tespit edilmiş oluyor.(…) Ehemmiyetle şayanıkayıttırki, şimdiye kadar her sene büyük millet meclisi önünde icra edilmekte olan geçit resmi, yolun yokuş vaziyeti itibariyle artık aynı mahalde yapılmasına imkân yoktur. Bundan böyle geçit resmi yeni yarış yerinde yapılabilir. Yarış yerinde inşa edilecek ve maksada kâfi gelecek olan tribünlerle bir güne mahsus kurulan tribünlerin inşa ve bilhare sökülme masraflarından da böylelikle kurtulmuş olunur. Yukarıdaki esbabı mucibeden dolayı müdüriyeti aliyenin, profesör Yansenin 2600 numaralı plânını berayı tasvip ve tastik hey’eti vekileye arzla vasi mikyasta bir iş olan yarış yerinin yapılması ve işe vaktinden başlanması için yarış yeri ile alakadar ve lazım olan bilcümle mebani ve yollar inşaatı hakkında biran evvel mukarrerat ittihaziyle inşaatın ihale edilmesi hususunda icabına tevessül buyrulması cümlei maruzatımdır efendim. Örley [imza] Appendix 16 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 25.02.1930, Unpublished Official Document, no: 30.18.1.2..8.10..13. Original text is as: T.C. Dahiliye Vekâleti, Sayı: 655.23 [antet] Baş Vekâleti Celileye,
113
Profesör Yansen tarafından tanzim olunan Stadyum ve yarış yerine ait 2600 numaralı Planla bu hususa ait İmar Müdüriyeti hey’eti fenniyesinin izahnamesi ve Mösyö Yansenin mektubu leffen taktim kılınmıştır. İmar Müdüriyeti teşkilâtına ait kanun ahkâmına tevfikan Projenin İcra Vekilleri hey’etince tasdikina müsade buyrulmasını arz eylerim. Cumhuriyet bayramlarında icrası mutat geçit resimlerimlerin yarış yerinde yapılması muvafık olacağı düşünülmekte bulunduğundan tasvip buyrulduğu takdirde mahalli mezkûrun Plan dairesinde şimdiden tanzimi için muktazi inşaata başlanması lûzumunun icap edenlere emir buyrumasını ayrıca istirham eylerim efendim. Dahiliye Vekili, Ş. Kaya [İmza] Appendix 17 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 26.02.1930, Unpublished Official Document, no: 30.18.1.2..8.10..13. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Muamelât Müdürlüğü, Sayı: 8922 [antet] Kararname (…) Dahiliye Vekaletinin 25.2.930 tarih ve 655.23 numaralı tezkeresile yapılan teklifi İcra Vekilleri Heyetinin 26.2.930 tarihli içtimaında görüşülerek gelecek Millî Bayram resim geçidinin mezkûr mahalde icrasına ve stadyomun da orada yapılmasına karar verilmiştir. Reisicumhur ve 10 vekil [imzalar] Appendix 18 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 24.07.1932, Unpublished Official Document, no: 18.101.27.1939. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Muamelât Müdürlüğü, Sayı:13209 Kararname Şehir Mütehassısı Profesör Yansen tarafından tanzim edilerek Dahiliye Vekâletinin 4.7.932 tarih ve 578.80 numaralı tezkeresile tevdi olunan Ankara Şehrine ait 1.4000 mikyasındaki iki harita İcra Vekilleri Heyetinin 23.07.932 tarihli içtimaında tetkik edilerek 1351 numaralı kanunun ikinci maddesine tevfikan tasdik olunmuştur. Appendix 19 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 04.08.1933, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.10.122.868.8. Original text is as: Dr. Ing. E.h. Hermann Jansen, Berlin [antet] Tercüme: Başvekil İsmet Paşa Hazretlerine, Zatı devletlerinin Ankara’nın imar ve inkişafı hususundaki büyük alakasını takdir edenlerden olduğumdan müstakpel Ankaranın şehircilik noktai nazarından 12 adet resmini takdim ediyorum... her Vekâletin mücavir [komşu] bina ve manzara ile tesanüdü [dayanışma] bozan bina oturtmaması lâzımgelir. Bundan maada [başka] verilmiş kararlar ve ikmal [bitirme] edilmiş projeler -mesela 1933 sergi binası- karşısında bırakılmayarak hali tasavvurda olan inşaat hakkında vaktü zamanında haberdar edilmekliğim icapeder...inşaat programının umumi hatları birkaçsene için tayin edilmelidir; şimdiye kadar meydana gelen inşaatın bazı yerlerinde bu gibi mütecanis [tek türlü] bir hatı harekete malesef tesadüf olunmamaktadır. Tek bir binanın meydana gelmesi yol, meydan, park ve manzaradan mürekkep bir şehrin meydana gelmesinden daha kolay olduğu malumu acizane bulunduğu halde Ankaranın imarı muvaffakiyetle neticelenmelidir. Bundan dolayı heyeti vekilece buna göre kararın meydana gelmesi bendenizi minnettar bırakır... H. Jansen [imza] Aynı resimleri Reisicumhur hazretlerine de takdim ettim.
114
Appendix 20 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 24.02.1930, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C Ankara Vilayeti, Tahrirat, 1.93 [antet] Yarış ve Islâh Encümeni Riyaseti Celilesi’ne, Z. 15.02.1930 ve 1.87. Bu sene yapılacak yarış yerinin tesviyesi masrafı mucip [gereken] olmagla beraber basit bir işdir. Milli Müdafaa Vekâletince Sekizinci Fırka Kumandanlığı tarafından bu yerin tesviyesi için bir amele veya istihkâm taburu verilmesine muvafakat edildiği takdirde bir Mühendisin nezareti altında bu tesviye ameliyesinin muvaffakiyetle ve sur’atle intaç [netice,sonuç] olunabileceği ve bu suretle 40-50 bin lira tasarruf edileceği teemmül kılınmış ise de iktizasının [gerekme] ifası iradei Devlelerine-menut [bağlı] bulunduğunu arz eylerim efendim. Vali Nevzat [imza] Appendix 21 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 16.03.1930, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekalet Muamelât Müdürlüğü [antet] M.M. Vekâletine, Yarış ve Islah Encümeni tarafından şehrin planında tayin olunan mahalde yaptırılmasına başlanan yarış mahallinin aynı zamanda Cumhuriyet yıl dönümlerinde resmi geçit icrasına müsait bir şekilde yapılması mukarrer bulunduğundan sahanın tanzimi ameliyesine M.M. ca tevessül edilmesi hususunun icap edenlere emir buyrulmasını ve iş’arını rica ederim efendim. Başvekil namına Müsteşar Appendix 22 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 27.04.1930, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C Ankara Vilayeti, Tahrirat, 1. 196 [antet] Yarış ve Islâh Encümeni Riyaseti Celilesi’ne, Z. 15.02.1930 ve 1.87 ve 1.93 Yarış yerinin yapılmasına bu sene başlanmasa bile sahanın tahdidi elzem ve zaruridir. Tahdit yapılırsa paraya mütevakkıf olmıyan ezcümle tesviyenin peyderpey yapılabileceği mütalaa olunmaktadır. Tasvibi Devletlerine arz eylerim efendim. Vali Nevzat [imza] Appendix 23 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 04.05.1930, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekalet Muamelât Müdürlüğü [antet] Ankara Vilâyetine, 27.4.1930 tarihli ve 1.196 numaralı tezkere cevabıdır. Başvekil Paşa Hz.nin Yarış yerinin tahdidine hemen başlanmasını ve vilâyetçe verilen tahsisatla tesviyesinin yapılmasını tensip buyurduklarını arz ederim efendim. Başvekil namıma Müsteşar Appendix 24 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 11.06.1930, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekalet Muamelât Müdürlüğü [antet] Dahiliye Vekaletine,
115
Yeni yarış yerinin İmar Müdüriyeti heyeti fenniyesince tayin ve tahdidi rica edilmiş idi. Ameliyat ve inşaata başlanması mukarrer olduğundan tespit ve tahdit hususunun ne dereceye kadar yapılmış olduğuna dair malûmat itasına müsaade buyrulmasını rica ederim efendim. Başvekil namına Müsteşar Appendix 25 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 11.06.1930, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekalet Muamelât Müdürlüğü [antet] Ankara Vilâyetine, 10.06.930 tarihli ve M.H.M (Muhasebei Hususiye Müdürlüğü) 249.2265 numaralı tezkere cevabıdır. Tribün masrafı inşaiyesi için vilâyet bütçesinden tahsis edilmiş olan 30 000 liranın Yarış ve Islah Encümeni hesabına Ziraat Bankasına tevdi ve iş’ar buyurulmasını rica ederim efendim. Başvekil namına Müsteşar Appendix 26 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 08.11.1930, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekalet Muamelât Müdürlüğü [antet] Ankara Vilâyetine, Şehrin planına göre yeniden ve asri bir şekilde inşası takarrür eden Yarış Yeri için vilâyetin 930 bütçesinden verilen otuz bin lira kâfi gelmediği ve Encümence de başka cihette karşılık bulunamadığı mühim masrafı istilzam eden bu inşaata başlanamamış ve mezkûr para bankada tennufe edilmekte bulunmuştur. Önümüzdeki yaz mevsiminde inşaata başlanmak üzre 1931 vilâyet bütçesine bu husus için elli bin lira daha iraz ve tahsis buyurulduğu takdirde şehrin imarından başka hayvan ıslahı noktasından da çok faydalı ve hayırlı bir hizmet ve himmet yapılmış olacağından muktezasına tevessül ve neticeden malûmat ita buyurulmasını rica ederim efendim. Başvekil namına Müsteşar Appendix 27 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 03.01.1931, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C. Sihhat ve İçtimaî Muavenet Vekâleti Hıfzısıhha İşleri Umum Müdürlüğü [antet] Başvekâlet-i Celileye C. 18.12.930 tarih ve 6.4439 numaralı tezkerelerine. Stadyom ve yarış yeri için tefrik olunan sahada cereyan eden İncesu ve Hatıp çayları mecralarının tebdili hususu Sıtma mücadele heyetimiz tarafından mahallen tetkik ettirilerek bu hususta her iki çaya mülâkı olan umumi drenaj kanallarile o sahada mevcut müteferrik ve müteaddit kaynakları akıtan kurutma kanal ve mecralarının iptali ve binnetice bu sahanın eski şekilde bataklık bir hale gelmesine sebep olması gibi mahzurlar dolayısile sıtma mücadelesi noktai nazarından şayanı ehemniyet görülmüştür. Yalnız hali hazırı itibarile en müsait tarzda akan İncesu mecrasının olduğu gibi ipkasıle işbu mahzur ve mülahazaların kısmı mühiminin bertaraf olacağı tahmin edilmekte ve Hatıp çayının Akköprü şosası üzerindeki Toygaroğlu köprüsünden itibaren işbu şosaya daha çok yakın ve bittabi koşu sahasından hariç yeni bir yatak dahiline alınması mümkün görülmektedir. Binaenaleyh İncesuyun hali hazır şekilde yeni bir yatak dahilinde alınması kabul buyrulduğu takdirde bu hususta icapedecek tetkıkat ve ameliyatı fenniyenin Nafia Vekâleti Su İşleri Müdüriyetinden icrasına müsaâdeleri arzolunur efendim. Sıhhat ve İçtimaî Muavenet Vekili [Refik Saydam]
116
Appendix 28 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 24.03.1931, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekalet Muamelât Müdürlüğü’nden, Nafıa Vekâletine, Yeni yarış yeri ve stadyum olacak sahadan geçmekte olan suların mecralarının tetkiki hakkında yazılan 20.12.930 ve 6.4439 numaralı tezkere, S. ve İçtimaî Muavenet Vekâletine de yazılmıştı. Vekâleti müşarileyhadan alınan cevabın sureti leffen takdim kılındı. Yarış yeri ve stadyumun bu sene inşası mukarrer olduğundan Vekâleti Celilelerince bu bapta yaptırılan taktik neticesinin ve mütalealalarının tesrıi[çabuklaştırma] iş’arına [yazı ile bildirme] müsaadelerinizi rica ederim efendim. Başvekil namına Müsteşar Appendix 29 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 26.04.1931, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C. Nafia Vekâleti Sular Umum Müdürlüğü [antet] Suret Gerek İnce su ve gerek Bent deresi çaylarının sarfiyatları belli olmadığından yerine mevcut normal maktalardan [kesit] ve meyilden bu sarfiyatlar hesap edilerek yeniden inşa edilecek mecralarda aynı makta kabul edilmiştir. Meyiller değiştiği takdirde tabi maktalarda ona nisbeten denişecektir. İnce su: Mevcut maktanın sathi 4.70 m² olup meyli de 3-promildir; yeni mecranın meyilini 2 % indirmeye mecbur olduğumuzdan sarfiyatı muhafaza edilmek şartile makta sathi 7.50 m² kabul edilmiştir. Km 0.000 dan Km 0.380 kadar setler inşa edilecektir. Bu setler Bent deresinin kabarmış suyunu taşmaması için yapılmıştır. Setlerin tokmaklanmasına ehemniyet verilmelidir. Bent deresi: Yeni taban İnce suyuna akıntı vermek için bir metre kadar indirilmiştir. Eski tabandan yeni taban geçmek için bir metrelik şüt inşası icap ediyor. Km 2.017 – 2.416 kadar imla ihraç edilmiş topraktan yapılacaktır. Yeni mecradan çıkan toprak derenin eski mecrasına nakil ve imla edilecektir. Bent deresi bendinden ayrılan sulama kanalının su verilmediğinden Ak köprü bendinde kapaklı mehaz [kaynak] tertibatı ve tahliye kapağı yapılarak 852 metre tulinde yeni bir sulama kanalı inşa edilmesi icap edilmektedir efendim. Mühendis Abdullah Appendix 30 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 07.05.1931, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C. Nafia Vekâleti Sular Umum Müdürlüğü [antet] Baş Vekâleti Celilesine 24.3.931 Tarih ve 2.211 numaralı teskerelerine cevaptır. Ankara’da inşa edilecek olan Stadyom mahallini tathir [temizlemek] etmek için muvakkat [geçici] Projeler rapten takdim kılındı. İnce su ve bent deresinin mecralarının tebdil edilmesi ve mevcut su mehazı ile iska kanalının Akköprüye tebdil mevki ettirilmesi lazım gelmektedir. Bu ameliyat, Tahmini keşifnameye nazaran 60000 lira kadar bir masrafı istilzam etmektedir. Mezkur ameliyat suların alçak bulunduğu Haziran – Teşrini evvel aylarında icra edileceği cihetle bu meblağın Haziran bidayetinde emrimize verilmesinin teminine müsaadei devletlerini rica ederim. Şayet ameliyat gecikir ve sular yükseldiği zemana tesadüf ederse masraf hissedilecek bir surette tezayüt edecektir. Byu hesapta erazinin hazırlanması için elzem görülen mevcut tefcir borularının tebdil mevki ameliyatın nazarı itibare alınmadığı da arzolunur efendim. Nafia Vekili [Hilmi Uran]
117
Appendix 31 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 17.06.1931, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C. Ankara Vilâyeti Baytar Müdürlüğü, Sayı:377, [Antet] Başvekâlet-i Celileye Hülasa: Ankara’da yaptırılacak yarış yeri hakkında Lef.3 11.03.931 T.ve 2.209 numaralı tezkerei devletleri C: Ankara’da yaptırılacak yarış yerine ait Plan için açılacak müsabakaya iştirak şeraiti tespit ve kazanlara (5000)Lira ikramiye verilmesi düşünülmüştür. Keyfiyetin Yarış ve Islah Encümeni’nce de tezekkür ve tasvibine müsaadei devletlerini arz ve istirham ederim Efendim. Vali Nevzat Ek: Yarışma ilan metni Appendix 32 The program: 1) Circumscribing of the race site (walls, balustrades). 2) The leveling of ground of the site. 3) The drainage of the site. 4) The water installation which can irrigate whole site (city water installation has not been constructed around this site but it is very easy to meet with water by digging wells). 5) 30 meters wide grass running track and 15 meters wide sandy training track. 6) The circumscribing of the tracks (balustrades, wooden or concrete stakes, cherry laurel etc.). 7) Two bridges constructed above the brook that flows into the race site. 8) The installation for 30 meters wide grass track. 9) The ground of the 15 meters wide sandy track. 10) The stands for 5000 first class spectators. 11) The stands for 10 000 second class spectators. 12) Pelouse: Open space for third class spectators. 13) The stand for President of Republic. 14) The restaurants for first and second class spectators. 15) Agreement arbitrators’ spaces. 16) A waiting stable for 50 animals and a closed box for 20 animals will be constructed in the borders of first class space. 17) Ring field and its circumscribing in the first class space. 18) The units for tote-betting (pay-desks, automatic result boards, etc.). 19) Toilets. 20) The units of superintendents. 21) A room for discussions of superintendents. 22) The place of weighing animals. 23) The bathrooms and dressing rooms of jockeys. 24) The rooms for watchman of the tracks and his employee. 25) The rooms for accountancy of tote-betting and tickets. 26) The stores for equipments of irrigation, signboards, etc. 27) Signboards and their locations (automatic boards for numbers of race horses, the boards showing the winners, etc.). 28) Car parks. 29) A pharmacy and doctor office. 30) The office of chemist and veteran. 31) The apparatus for starting gates. 32) The police station. 33) The room for Council. 34) A room for owners of the horses. 35) A room for trainers. Appendix 33 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 04.10.1932, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.01...198.352.5. Original text is as: Dahiliye Vekâleti Emniyet İşleri Umum Müdürlüğü 1563.9473 [antet] H: Geçit resmînin koşu mahallinde yapılmasına dair. Yüksek Başvekâlete, 29 T.evvele tesadüf eden Cumhuriyet bayramında icrası mutat askerî geçit resmînin icra edildiği B.M.Meclisi önündeki yolun meyilli olması hasebile kıt’atın yürüyüş intizamını muhafazada müşkilât çektikleri ve geçit resminde bütün halkın istifade etmeleri matlûp olmasına nazaran mezkûr sahanın darlığı bu merasimden istifade edemiyen bir kısım halın teessürünü ve vaki izdihamdan intizamın muhafazasında da müşkilât hudusuni icabettirdiğinden ve müstakbel stat ve koşu mahallerinin ıslâhı da uzun zamana mütevakkaf bulunduğundan ve son zamanda yapılan geçit resmî mahallinin gerek zemin itibarile ve gerekse halkın seyri noktai nazarından gayri müsait olduğu bittecrübe anlaşıldığından bahisle bu seneki Cumhuriyet bayramında yapılacak geçit resmînin gerek zeminin düz ve muntazam
118
olması ve gerekse daha kefis halk kitlesinin geçit resminin seyretmelerine müsait bulunması itibarile hali hazır koşu mahallinde icrası muvafık olcağı Ankara Vilâyetinden iş’ar kılınmıştır. Tensip buyrulduğu takdirde şimdiden istihzaratta bulunmak üzere keyfiyetin iş’arına Yüksek Müsaadelerini arz ve rica ederim efendim. Dahiliye Vekili Ş. Kaya [imza] B.E.H. Reisliğine, M.Müdafaa Vekâletine yazılmıştır. Appendix 34 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 10.10.1931, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.1.68.451.1 Original text is as: T.C. M.M.V. Hava Müsteşarlığı [Antet] 29 Teşrini evvel Cumhuriyet bayramına 50 den fazla tayyare iştirak edecektir. Ankara’nın 30 km garbinde bulunan (Çakırlar) meydanı köylüler tarafından kısmen sürülmüş olmakla beraber bu kadar miktarda Tayyarelerin inişine imkân vermemektedir. İnişlerde utayyare kırımlarından içtinap [uzaklaşmak] için Ankara koşu meydanından istifade zerureti [gereklilik] vardır mezkür koşu meydanındaki kazıkların bir gün için kaldırılması ve tekrar yerine konması Vekaletçe temin edilmek şartıyla mezkur [adı geçen] meydandan istifade edilmesine izin verilmesini rica ederim. M.M.V. Zekai [Apaydın] Appendix 35 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 13.10.1931, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.1.68.451.1 Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Muamelat Müdürlüğü [antet] 10.03.1931 tarih ve Hava 1282.11360 numaralı tezkere cevaplarıdır: 29 Teşrinievvel Cumhuriyet bayramı günü uçacak Tayyarelerin inişi için Koşu yerinden istifade edilmesi muvafık görülerek keşfiyat Ankara Valiliğine de bildirilmişti. Ancak Cumhuriyet Bayramının ertesi 30 Ekim 1931 Cuma günü at yarışları icra edileceğinden yarışlara halel [zarar] gelmemek üzere sahadaki kazıkların merasimin bitimini müteakip çaktırılmasının icap edenlere emir buyrulmasını rica ederim. Başvekil namına Müsteşar Appendix 36 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 25.05.1933, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C. Dahiliye Vekâleti [antet] Ankara Vilâyetinin 25.05.1933 tarih ve 1529.411 numaralı tezkeresi suretidir. Hükümet Merkezinin en esaslı ihtiyaçlarından biri olan yarış yeri ve Stadyumun yaptırılması takarrür etmiş ve bunlara ait bütün tesisatın ancak dört milyon lira ile inşa ve ikmal edilebileceği anlaşılmıştı. İlk esas olarak bu tesisatın kredi ile yaptırılması ve bedelinin senelere taksim olunarak tediyesi düşünülmekte idi. Fakat bilahara yarış yeri ve Stadyumun bir an evvel inşası zaruret kesbetmesi üzerine şimdilik yarış yerinin ve Stadyumun maksadı temin edecek şekilde kullanılması şartlarını havi [içine alan] olarak yaptırılması daha muvafık görülmüştür. Bu iş için, elde mevcut olan (350 000) liraya ilaveten ahiren (2167) numaralı kanunla Meclisi Alice kabul olunan (400 000) ve Ankara Vilâyeti idarei hususiyersince bu kısım inşaatın ikmaline kadat iki senede verilecek olan (250 000) lira ki ceman bir milyon lira vardır. Bu para ile yarış yeri ve Stadyumun arz edilen kısımları yaptırılacak ve diğer kısımlarda senelere taksim olunarak ikmal edilecektir. Stadyum ve yarış yerinin tesisat ve inşaatına ait projelerin – ihzarına ve bu işin yaptırılmasına da üç grup talip olmuştur. Bu gruplar kendi hesaplarına hazırladıkları projeleri 10 Haziran 1933 tarihinde Vilâyete vereceklerdir. Malumu devletleri olduğu üzere yarış yeri ve Stadyumun kati ihtiyaç dolayısile bir an evvel yaptırılması zaruri bulunduğundan müracaat eden ve bu işlerde ihtisasları olduğuna kanaat getirilen bu üç grubun verecekleri projelerden bir tanesinin şartnamesi
119
dairesinde seçilerek inşaata esas tutulması ve proje seçildikten sonra inşaat ve tesisatın bu proje dairesinde yaptırılmasının alelusul munakasaya [eksiltme] konulması muvafık olacağı mütelaasındayım. Keyfiyetin sureti leffen takdim kılınan Stadyum ve yarış yeri projesinin seçimine ait şartname ve münakasanın ana hatlarının Heyeti Vekilei Celilece tasdiki için bir karar ittihazına delalet ve müsadlerini arz ve istirham eylerim efendim. Dahiliye Vekâletine ve malumaten yarış ve ıslah Encümeni Reisliği’ne arz olunmuştur. Appendix 37 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 29.05.1933, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C. Dahiliye Vekâleti [antet] Yüksek Baş Vekâlete Ankara’da yapılacak yarış yeri ve Stadyum için müracaat eden üç grup tarafından tanzim edilen Proje ve planın seçme şartnamesi ve münakasanın ana hatlarının Yüksek Heyeti Vekilece tasdikine müsaade buyrulması hakkında Ankara Vilayetinden alınan tezkere ve merbutunun suretleri leffen takdim kılınmıştır. Keyfiyetin İcra Vekilleri Heyetince bir karara bağlanmasına müsadelerini arz ve rica eylerim efendim. Dahiliye Vekili Ş.Kaya [imza] Appendix 38 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 25.05.1933, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.10.01.03.36.40.13. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Muamelât Müdürlüğü, no:14472 [antet] Ankara’da yapılacak yarış yeri ve stadyum için müracaat eden üç gurup tarafından tanzim edilen ve Dahiliye Vekilliğinin 29.05.1933 tarih ve 390.53 sayılı tezkeresi ile gönderilen ilişik proje ve plânın seçme şartnamesi ve münakasasının ana hatları İcra Vekilleri Heyetinin 29.05.933 toplanışında tetkik edilerek tasdiki kararlaştırılmıştır. Reisicumhur G.M.Kemal ve vekiller [imza] Appendix 39 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 06.06.1933, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.02..37.43.06. Original text is as: T.C. Dahiliye Vekâleti, Sayı 390.57 [antet] Yüksek Baş Vekâlet Makamına, Ankara Vilayetinden alınan bir tezkerede: Yarş yeri ve stadyüm projesini seçecek heyetin Heyeti Vekilece tesbiti bildirilmektedir. 29.05.933 tarih ve 14472 numaralı kararname ile kabul edilen şartnamenin (3) üncü maddesi mucibince planların seçilmesi için Heyetin Yüksek Heyeti Vekilece tesbiti zikredilmekde ve bu Heyetin Cumhuriyet Halk Fırkası umumi kâtibi Kütahya Mebusu Recep, Erzincan Mebusu Safvet, Erzurum mebusu Aziz Beyefendilerle suvari müfettişi Mürsel Paşa Hazretleri ve Ziraat Vekâleti Müsteşarı Atif, yarış ve ıslah encümeni azasından Atif, İmar Müdür vekili İrfan Beyefendilerden teşkili muvafıkı mütelaa kılınmakda olduğundan keyfiyetin İcra Vekilleri Heyetince bir karara bağlanmasına Yüksek müsaadelerini arz ve rica ederim efendim. Dahiliye Vekili Ş. Kaya [imza] Appendix 40 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 08.06.1933, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.02.37.43.09. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Muamelat Müdürlüğü, sayı: 14528 [antet] 07.06.933 tarih ve 14525 sayılı kararnameye zeyldir. Ankara’da yapılacak yarış yeri ve stadyum planlarını seçmek üzre toplanacak heyet arasına Nafia Vekâleti Yollar Umum Müdürü Fehmi Bey’in de katılması; Dahiliye vekilliğinin
120
07.06.933 tarih ve 390.57 sayılı tezkeresi ile yapılan teklifi üzerine İcra Vekilleri Heyetince 08.06.933’de kabul olunmuştur. Dahiliye, Nafia, Maarif Vekilliğine, Başvekil Namına Müsteşar Appendix 41 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 08.06.1933, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.02.37.43.09. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Muamelat Müdürlüğü [antet] Cumhuriyet Halk Fırkası Umumî Kâtibi Kütahya mebusu Recep Beyefendiye, Ankara yarış ve stadyom yerine ait plânları seçmek üzre teşkil edilecek heyet hakkında olup tasdik için Reisi-Cumhur hazretlerinden arz edilmiş olan kararnamelerin örnekleri ilişik olarak malumat için sunulmuştur. Başvekâlet Müsteşarı Appendix 42 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 10.06.1933, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: Cumhuriyet Halk Fırkası Kâtibiumumiliği [antet] Suret Ankara Belediyesi Riyaseti Aliyesine, Muhterem efendim, Yarış yeri ve stadyom inşasına iştirak etmekliğimiz hakkında bundan evvel lûtuf buyrulan fennî izahat ve inşaat komisyonunca verilen tafsilâta istinaden bu işin mahdut bir münakasa şeklinde ihale edileceğini istidlâl ederek ona göre planlarımızı ve keşiflerimizi hazırlamıştık. Fakat bir iki gün evvel tarafı âlilerinden vaki olan iş’arda şimdilik planların ve projelerin müsabakaya konulduğu ve bunların Halkevinde teşhiri lâzımgeldiği bildirilmiştir. Müessesemiz bu şekilde bir müsabakaya girebilecek kadar istihzaratta bulunmadığından ve böyle bir hazırlık için de epeyce zamana muhtaç bulunduğundan açılan bu müsabakaya maatteessüf iştirak eyleyemeyecektir. İleride inşaatın ihalesi için münakasa ilân edildiği takdirde bu işe şimdiden hazır olan müssessemizin dahi nazarı dikkate alınmasını rica eyleriz. Arzu buyrulursa inşaata ait keşifnamemizi şimdiden takdim edebiliriz. Emirlerinize intizaren ihtiramatı mahsusamızın kabulünü rica ederiz, muhterem efendim. Deutsche Landeskulturbau Gesellschaft Appendix 43 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 15.06.1933, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.02.37.47.10., p. 1. Original text is as: Cumhuriyet Halk Fırkası Kâtibiumumiliği [antet] Yüksek Başvekâlete, Ankara’da yapılan stadyom ve yarış yeri planlarından birinci ve ikincinin seçilmesi vazifesini alan heyetimiz 1933 senesi Haziranının 11. Pazar ve 12. pazartesi günleri Halkevi’nde toplanarak çalışmıştır.Bu çalışmada İcra Vekilleri Heyeti’nin 7.6.1933 ve 8.6.1933 tarih ve 14525.14528 numaralı kararlarile bu kararlarda zikri geçen 28.5.1933 tarih ve 14472 numaralı karar hükümleri göz önünde tutulmuştur. Çalışma için tayin edilen saatlerde mevcut üç firmadan İtalyan (Barosi ve Vietti Violi) ile Macar (David Jones es fia) eserlerini teşhir ederek heyet huzurunda uzun uzadıya izahat vermişlerdir. Alman (Deutsche Landeskulturbau Gesellschaft) firması münasabakaya iştirake hazır olmadığını sureti bu arizaya bağlı olarak takdim edilen mektupla bildirilmiş olduğu için müsabaka harici tutulmuş ve seçme tetkikatı diğer iki firmanın eserleri üzerinde yapılmıştır.(…) Âzalar 9 adet [imza]
121
Appendix 44 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 15.06.1933, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.02.37.47.10., p.3. Original text is as: Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi Kâtibiumumiliği [antet] Haşiye: Heyetimizde âza bulunan İmar Müdür vekili İrfan Bey şehir mimarı Mösyö Yansenden gelen son şehir haritasına göre büyük Millet Meclis ibinasının garbından gelerek istasyon caddesinin 200 metre kadar garbından geçen yeni bir nakliye yolunun ilâve olnduğunu söyledi ve bu yol Yenişehir haritası üzerinde mütalea olundu. Birinciliği kabul olunan plana göre stat ve yarış yeri sahasının ortasından geçecek böyle bir nakliye yolu bütün stat ve yarış yeri sahasının güzelliğini ve sıhhî şartlarını bozacaktır. Haritadaki yeni vaziyete uymak için planın olduğu gibi yeni ilâve edilen nakliye yolunun garbına alınması da kabil değildir. Bu takdirde son haritaya göre garpta kalan ve şehir etrafında bir tur yapan ana yolun sahanın garp parçası üzerinde aynı mahzuru olacaktır. Bu ikinci halde, yarış ve insan sporu yerlerinin istasyon caddesinden ve göz önünden uzaklaşarak şehrin güzelliğinden kaybetmek mahzuru da vardır. Yeni bir şehir olarak kurulan Ankara’da müstesna fırsat olarak ele geçen şehrin içinde yekpare bir spor sahası vücuda getirmek imkânının kaybedilmesini ve tasavvur halindeki yeni nakliye yoluna uymak yüzünden arsadaraltılarak spor yerlerindeki abadın bozulmasını ve muhtelif spor yerlerinin sıkıştırılmasını doğru bulmuyoruz. Bunun için takdirimize göre lüzumlu bir şey olmayan ve ikinci derecede bir düşünceden doğan bu yeni nakliye yolundan vazgeçilmesini veyahut bu yolun hemen istasyon caddesine bitişik olarak yaptırılmasını Yüksek Başvekâlet makamına arz ve teklif eyliyoruz. Şehir planı üzerinde mütelealar yürütmek heyetimizin çalışma sınırı içinde olmamakla beraber tatbikı mevzubahis olan plana dokunacak bir nokta olmak itibarile mevzubahis etmiş oluyoruz. Appendix 45 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 19.06.1933, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.02.37.47.10. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Muamelât Müdürlüğü [antet] Kararname , Sayı:14609 Ankara’da yapılacak Stadyom ve Yarış yeri için hazırlanan plânlardan birinci ve ikincinin seçilmesi için 7,8.06.933 tarih ve 14448,14525 sayılı kararnamelerle teşkil olunan Heyet’in 15.6.933 tarihli uzun raporu İcra Vekilleri Heyeti’nin 19.6.933 tarihli toplanışında görüşülerek İtalyan (Barosi ve Vietti Violi) projesinin Ankara ihtiyacına elverişli, teknik ve iktisadî esaslara uyugun olduğu görülmekle teklif veçhile adı geçen İtalyan projesinin kabulüne karar verilmiştir. Reisicumhur ve vekiller [imza] Appendix 46 “Vahit Fiyatlar ve Keşif Miktarları,” 1934, T.C. Ankara Şehri Stadyum, Hipodrom, Spor Merkezi Şartnameleri ve Keşifleri (Ankara: Hakimiyeti Milliye Matbaası) The estimate costs of the works mentioned above are: Causeway, Border Walls : 38454.00 TL (they will be constructed through the station road nearly 870 meters long) Surrounding Walls : 47560.00 TL (Wire Fences: 3390 Meters; Concrete Walls: 336 Meters) Tracking Ways: 252570.00 TL Grass Tracking Ways:20-30 Meters Wide, 89700m² Sand Tracking Ways: 12 Meters Wide, 31300 m² Military Parade Ways: 25-40 Meters Wide, 73600 m² Internal Leveling, Arranging And Limitation: 147769.00 TL Irrigation Installation Of Track Ways: 130660.00 TL
122
Olympic Stadium: 211489.85 TL + 24800.00 TL Stables And Saddling Boxes : 108898.88 TL The Stands For Military Parades: 69824.54 TL Scaling Building: 35302.07 TL Arbitrator Shed: 4500 TL Sewers And Hygienic Installation: 47321 TL The Stand Of President Of Republic: 119632.50 TL First Class Stands Of Hippodrome: 131211.00 TL TOTAL: 1 369 782.84 TL Appendix 47 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 15.01.1935, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.1.2.52.11..12. Original text is as: T.C. Maliye Vekâleti Kambiyo Müdürlüğü, no: 4832 [antet] Yüksek Baş Bakanlığa, Öz: İtalya’dan alınacak Stadyum malzemesinin bedelleri hakkında: Dahiliye Bakanlığı’nın Yüksek Makamınızdan Bakanlığımıza havale buyrulan merbut tezkeresine nazaran: Ankara Stadyum alanında askerî geçit resimleri için sökülür kurulur demir çubuklardan dokuz Tribün için İtalya’dan pazarlıkla alınacak malzemenin memlekete sokulması ve bedeli olan 505 000 İtalyan liretinin döviz olarak verilmesi Ankara Vilâyeti’nin iş’arına atfen bildirilmekte ve bunun için İcra Vekilleri Hey’etinden karar alınmasına müsaade buyrulması rica olunmaktadır. İtalya Hükümeti ile aramızda halen Kliring mukavelesi hükümleri cari bulunduğundan bu Memleketten ithal olunacak eşya ve emtia bedelleri Kliring çerçevesi dahilinde tediye olunmakta ve bu itibarla Kliringli bir memlekete döviz verilmesi mevzuubahs olamıyacağından İcra Vekilleri Hey’etinden karar alınmasına lüzum bulunmamaktadır. 505 000 İtalya liretinin tutarı olan Türk parası Merkez Bankası’na yatırıldığı ve oradan alınacak bir makbuz eşyanın imrar [geçirme] olunacağı gümrük idaresine ibraz olunduğu takdirde mezkûr [adı geçen] eşyanın serbestçe geçirilmesine mani bulunmadığını arz ederim. Maliye Bakanı [Fuat Ağralı] Appendix 48 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 26.01.1935, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.02.52.11..12..Original text is as: T.C. İktisat Vekâleti, Türkofis -Türkiye Dış Ticaret İşleri Milli Ofisleri- Dairesi, no: 3167 Başvekâlet Yüksek Makamına, Yüksek Makamınızdan Vekilliğime havale buyurulan, Dahiliye Vekilliği’nin 13.1.935 tarih ve 294 sayılı yazısında sözü geçen Ankara Stadyum alanı için İtalya’dan getirilecek 505 000 İtalyan liretlik demir çubukların kontenjan dışında memlekete girmesi teklifi ile Maliye Vekilliği’nin bu husustaki mütalanamesi okundu. Gümrük tarifesinin 520B pozisyonuna giren her nevi galvanizli demirlerin, 1156 sayılı kararnamenin 3. maddesi hükümlerine göre İtalya’dan ithali serbesttir. Ankara stadyum alanında askerî geçit resimleri için yapılacak tribünlere ait 505 000 liret değerindeki çubuklarda bu tarife pozisyonuna girdiği takdirde aynı hükümden istifade edeceklerinden bunların serbestçe ithalleri için karaname alınmasına lüzum yoktur. 520A tarife pozisyonuna giren adî demir çubuklar içinde İtalya anlaşmasına bağlı C listesinde 9 aya mahsus olmak üzere 45 000 (?) kilo kontenjan mevcuttur. Bu miktardan fazla yapılacak ithalat İtalya’ya bazı Türk mallarının ihracına bağlıdır. Stadyum tribünlerine ait demir çubuklar bu tarife pozisyonuna girdiği ve yukarıda arzolunan anlaşma hükümleri dahilinde ithaline imkan bulunmadığı takdirde bunların kontenjan dışında memlekete sokulmasında Vekilliğimizce bir mahsur görülmemektedir. Demir çubuklar bedelinin döviz olarak ödenmesi hususuna gelince, İtalya Kliring anlaşması hükümlerinin, bu memleketten yapılacak bilcümle ithalâta ait tediyatın kliring yolile ödenmesini âmir bulunduğu malûmu Devletleridir. Bu hüküm dışına çıkılması ,takip etmekte
123
olduğumuz kliring sisteminin esaslarına aykırı ve memleket aleyhine bir hareket olacaktır. Bu itibarla stadyum için İtalya’dan alınacak 505 000 İtalyan liretlik demir çubukların bedelinin de herhalde kliring yolile ödenmesi lazım geldiği mütaleasında bulunduğumu arzederim. İktisat Vekili Celal Bayar [imza] Appendix 49 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 04.02.1935, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.01.51.8.3. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Müdürlüğü, Sayı 2.1946 [antet] Kararname Dahiliye Vekilliği’nden yazılan 13.01.935 tarih ve 294 sayılı tezkerede; Ankara Stayum Alanı’nda askerî geçit resimleri için yapılacak tribünlere gerekli 505 000 liretlik demirlerin kontenjana bakmadan memlekete sokulması ve bedelinin dövizle ödenmesi hakkında bir karar ittihazı istenilmiş ve Maliye,İktisat ve Gümrük ve İnhisarlar Vekilliklerinden yazılan 15.01.935, 26.01.935, 31.01.935 tarih ve 4832,441 ve 11790.105 sayılı mütaleanamelerde; İtalya’dan alınacak olan bu çubuklar gümrük tarifesinin 520 B pozisyonuna girdiği takdirde 2.1156 sayılı kararnamenin KL. Listesinde bulunmasından ötürü serbestçe memlekete girebileceği ve 520 A posizyonuna giren kısmı için İtalya Antlaşması’nda kontenjan bulunduğundan buna mahsup edildikten sonra fazla kalırsa kontenjan harici geçirilmesi ve ancak parasının dövizle ödenmesine imkân olmayıp kliring yolile ödenmesi gerekli bulunduğu bildirilmiştir. Bu iş İcra Vekilleri Heyeti’nce 04.02.935 te görüşülerek bahsi geçen demir çubukların kontenjan listelerinden istifade etmediği takdirde bedeli kliring yolile ödenmek üzere kontenjan harici memlekete sokulmasına izin verilmesi onanmıştır. Reisicumhur K.Atatürk ve vekiller [imza] Appendix 50 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 04.02.1935, Unpublished Official Document, no: 18.148.52.1935. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Kararlar Müdürlüğü [antet] Suret: Ankara’da yaptırdığımız Stadyum ve Hipodrom alanında önümüzdeki sene içinde askerî geçit resimleri için sökülür kurulur demir çubuklardan dokuz dane tribün yaptıracağız. Esaslı tribünler yapıldığı takdirde at koşuları sırasında bu tribünler görüş vaziyetini oldukça daraltacaklarından koşu zamanlarında derhal kaldırılacak ve icabında kolaylıkla kurulacak bu tribünlerin yapılması çok yerinde olacaktır. 5300 kişi alacak olan bu tribünlere ait malzeme İtalya’da Milano’da kâin Fratelli NNocenti müessesesinin beratı altında bulunmakta olup yapılan tetkıkat neticesinde Gümrük resmi hariç olmak üzere İstanbul’a teslimi 55 000 liraya mal olacaktır.
1. 2490 sayılı Artırma ve eksiltme ve ihale kanunun 46 ıncı maddesinin N fıkrasına göre bu malzemenin İtalya’da Milano’da kâin Fratelli İnnocenti müessesinden pazarlıkla satın alınması ve memlekete sokulması için İcra Vekilleri Heyeti kararı ile
2. 505 000 liretten ibaret bulunan bedelin İtalyan lireti üzerinden döviz olarak verilmesi için gerek olan kararın istihsaline müsaade buyrulmasını arz eylerim.
Aslının aynıdır. Başvekil namına Müsteşar Appendix 51 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 15.09.1934, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.02.48.62.2. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Muamelât Müdürlüğü Sayı:2.1242 [antet] Kararname
124
Stadyom ve Hipodrom inşaat ve tesisatı için İtalya’dan Ankara Gümrüğüne getirilen ilişik fatura ve listelerde yazılı fennî vasıtalarla bunların teferruatının, 1499 sayılı Gümrük Tarife Kanunun 5. maddesinin 17. fıkrasına göre, iş bittikten sonra mahrecine iade edilmek kaydiyle teminat mukabilinde Türkiye’ye sokulmasına izin verilmesi; Gümrük ve İnhisarlar Vekilliğinin 12.9.934 tarih ve 16056.23 sayılı tezkeresi üzerine İcra Vekilleri Heyetince 15.09.934’te tasvip ve kabul olunmuştur. Reisicumhur Gazi Mustafa Kemal ve vekiller [imza] Appendix 52 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 04.05.1935, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.02.54.34.6. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Müdürlüğü , Sayı 2.2470 [antet] Kararname Ankara’da yaptırılmakta olan Stadyom ve Hipodrom yapısında kullanılmak üzere lüzumu olan Freze makinası ile teferruatının işi bittikten sonra geri gönderilmek şartıla, 1449 sayılı Gümrük tarifesi kanunun 5 inci maddesinin 17 inci fıkrasına göre muvakkaten memlekete sokulmasına izin verilmesi; Gümrük ve İnhisarlar Vekilliği’nin 04.05.935 tarih ve 20606.152 sayılı tezkeresi üzerine İcra Vekilleri Hey’etince 04.05.935 de onanmıştır. Reisicumhur K.Atatürk ve vekiller [imza] Appendix 53 “Haberler: Stadyum İnşaatı,” 1934, Arkitekt Vol:2, p.65; Ankara Vilâyeti Nafia Müdürü Muammer, “Bayındırlık Haberleri: Stadyom ve Hipodrom İnşaatına Ait Rapor,” 1935-36, Nafia İşleri Mecmuası Vol:7-12, p. 58. 4) Tahsisat vaziyeti Muvazenei Umumiyeden muavenet……….………………..……….……………..400 000 TL İdman İttifakları Heyetinden…………………………………….......................... … 23 820 TL Vilayet 932 bütçesinden ayrılarak Yarış ve Islah Encümenine verilip alınan…….....89 000 TL Vilayet 933 bütçesinden ayrılan……………………………………………………242 000 TL Vilayet 934 bütçesinden ayrılan………………………...………………………….200 000 TL Vilayet 935 bütçesinden ayrılan ………………………..……………………….…350 000 TL İncesu deresinin ıslahı ve civarının drenajı için Muvazenei Umumiyeden verilen...300 000 TL Toplam : ………………………………………………..… ….1 604 820 TL 5) Taahhüd ve Sarfiyat Vaziyeti:. 935 senesinde istimlak ve müteferrik masraflar………….. ……………………..82 973.11 TL 934 senesi stimlak ve müteferrik masraflar ………………… …………………...…32 802 TL Stadyom ve Hipodrom inşaatı ihale bedeli……………………………………….1 085 553 TL İncesu deresinin ıslahı ve sahanın drenajı…………………………………….…….300 000 TL Kanalizasyon inşaatı ……………………………………………………………..36 936.38 TL Demir çubuklardan tribünler……………………………………………………...….35 000 TL Demir tribünler için tahta ve sac ………………………………………………..…….7 000 TL Demir boruların nakliye tren ve dizbarko ve kurma masrafları……………………….6 000 TL Stadyom ve Hipodrom inşaatında keşif ilavesi …………………………………...…30 000 TL Genel toplam: …………………………………………… ………………..….1 604 264.00 TL Appendix 54 Haberler: Stadyum İnşaatı,” 1934, Arkitekt Vol:2, p.65; Ankara Vilâyeti Nafia Müdürü Muammer, “Bayındırlık Haberleri: Stadyom ve Hipodrom İnşaatına Ait Rapor,” 1935-36, Nafia İşleri Mecmuası Vol:7-12, pp.58-59. 6) Önümüzdeki sene içinde yapılması gerekli olan işler Hipodrom sahasını kuşatan yol asfalt olarak yapılacaktır. Alınan kararla 1936 senesi tahsisatından ödenmek üzere iş münakasaya konulmuştur. Keşif bedeli ……………………………………………………………………………………..75 000 TL
125
Umum sahanın ağaçlanması: saha çıplak bir vaziyettedir. Ağaçlanma ile halkın rağbet ve rahatlığı sağlanacaktır.En az……………………………………………………….40 000 TL Hipodromun Birinci sınıf tribünününün diğer yarısının inşası önümüzdeki sene içinde bitirilmes iuygun görülmektedir. Bunun bedeli tahmini……………………………120 000 TL Olimpik Stadyomun yalnız 1. sınıf tribünler ile pistler dikkate alınmıştır. 2. ve 3. sınıf tribünlerin de inşası zaruridir. Böylece umumi planda Olimpik stadyum işleri bitmiş olacaktır. Bedeli ………………………..220 000 TL Hipodrom Atatürk salonu, diğer salonlar, kütüphane, apartman, lokanta, tartılma salonu, bar ve Stadyom kısmında tefrişişi önümüzde ki sene yapılmalıdır.………………….. 50 000 TL Ayrıca futbol için 2, atletizm için 1 antreman yeri yapılması 1936 yılı içinde uygundur. Bedeli………………………………………………………………………………30 000 TL Hipodrom manialı koşu pisti ve buna ait sulama tesisatı da yapılırsa genel planın Hipodrom kısmı da az çok bitmiş olacaktır. Bunun bedeli………………………………………50 000TL Teşcir edilecek sahanın sulanması, İncesu yatağının dibinin kaplanması, kaplamanın Akköprüye kadar uzatılması, yol yapılacak kısma tesadüf eden sahanın istimlakı, Stadyum kalorifer tesisatı, Hipodrom önündeki otopark, sahanın iç tarafının genel tesviyesi, radyo tertibatı önümüzdeki sene yapılması uygundur…………………………………… 100 000 TL TOPLAM…………………………………………………………750 000 TL ihtiyaç vardır. Appendix 55 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 16.09.1936, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.02.68.78.3. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Müdürlüğü Kararname Ankara’da yaptırılmakta olan Stadyum ve Hipodrom’un tefrişatı için Fransa’da muhtelif yerlerden perakende suretile satın alınması gerekli görülen spora ait heykellerle 40 adet gravür bedelinin Fransa ile aramızdaki kliring anlaşmasına göre kliring yolu ile ödenmesi lâzımgelmekte ise de kliringte uzun müddet sıra beklemek mecburiyetine binaen bahsi geçen eşyanın serbest döviz verilmedikçe temin edilemeyeceği anlaşıldığından 936 takvim yılına ait döviz cetvellerinde konkurhipik için konulan tahsisattan temin edilen tasarruf karşılık tutulmak suretile mezkûr eşya bedeli için Ankara Vilâyeti emrine 1500 liralık serbest döviz müsaadesi verilmesi, Maliye Vekilliğinin 15.09.936 tarih ve 54279.12839 sayılı tezkeresi üzerine İcra Vekilleri Heyetince 16.09.936 da onanmışdır. Reisicumhur K.Atatürk ve vekiller [imza] Appendix 56 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 07.10.1937, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.02.79.85.8 Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Kararlar Dairesi Müdürlüğü, Karar Sayısı: 7499 [antet] Kararname Ankara Stadyum ve Hipodromunun ağaçlandırılması için teşkil olunana komisyonun 30 celselik toplantısında mesaî saatleri dışında vazife gören Ankara Vilâyeti Hususî İdare Müdürüne 1452 sayılı Teadül Kanunun 15 inci maddesi gereğince, celse başına 15 lira hesabile 450 lira ücret verilmesi; Dahiliye Vekilliğinin 20.9.1937 tarih ve 8248 sayılı tezkeresi ve Maliye Vekilliğinin 1.10.1937 tarih ve 1329.5016 sayılı mutaleannamesi üzerine İcra Vekilleri Heyetinin 7.10.937 toplantısında onanamıştır. Reisicumhur K. Atatürk ve 12 Vekil [imza] Appendix 57 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 17.11.1937, Unpublished Official Document, no: 490.01.569.2266.1. Original text is as: Türk Spor Kurumu Genel Merkezi [antet] Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi Genel Sekreterliğine,
126
Mimar ve Mühendis Vietti-Violi, kendisine evvelce yaptırılmış olan Spor sahaları planlarının ücretini Kurumumuzdan istemektedir. Bugüne kadar yaptığı planların bir listesini ilişik olarak sunuyorum.Bunlardan bazılarının ücretlerinin mahallen, bazılarının da Partiden ödenilmiş olmak ihtimali bulunduğu gibi fiatları hakkında da bir malûmat mevcut değildir. Diğer taraftan, bütün bu planalr birer avan-proje’den ibaret olup detay planları da yapılmamıştır. Bu projelerin kabul edildiğine göre detaylarının da aynı mimar tarafından yapılmasında fayda görülmektedir. Burada bulunan vekiline de arzumuz bildirilmiş ve kendisinden teklif mektubu istenmiştir. Halen yapmış ve birer suretini Kuruma vermiş oldukları sahalar avan projelerinin ücretlerinin Kurumca ödenmesi hususunda yüksek buyuruklarınızı rica eder, üstün saygılarımı sunarım. T.S.K. Asbaşkanı Aydın Saylavı [imza: A.Menderes] Ek: Mimar Vietti Violi’nin ücret istediği saha planlarının listesidir: (...) Appendix 58 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 10.07.1937, Unpublished Official Document, no: 490.01.569.2266.1. Original text is as: Mühendis Mimar Paolo Vietti-Violi, Ankara Palas Oteli [antet] Ekselans İsmet İnönü, İstanbul Son defa Ankarada bulunduğum sırada Türkiye Cumhuriyet Hükûmetinin, Büyük Millet Meclisi ve Başvekâlet binaları için yapılan bir müsabakaya muhtelif ecnebi mimarların iştirakini davet etmiş olduğunu işittim. Bu musabakaya hiçbir İtalyan Mimarın davet edilmemiş olduğunu hayretle öğrendim. Son seneler zarfında Türkiyede bana tevdi edilen işlerin icrası için göstermiş olduğum alâka ve sadakatı takdir buyurmuş olduğunuzdan davet olunan ecnebi mimarların listesine ismimi de ilâve edilmesini rica etmek ceseratinde bulunuyorum. Bu gibi mühim projeler üzerinde tedkikat yapmış olduğumu şimdiden arzetmekle beraber Türkiye Hükûmetine takdim etmek şerefine nail olacağım projenin, hem mimarî evsafı ve musabakanın vazettiği muhtelif meselelerin tedkiki noktai nazarından hem de muhiti, şehri vehatta memleketi ve arzettiği teşebbüs, malzem, işçilik v.s. kolaylıklarını çok iyi bildiğim cihetle müsabakaya iştirak edecek olan diğer mimarlarınkinden her halde daha engin olmayacağını şimdiden temin edebilirim. Bu ricam muvafık bir cevap buyrulmasını ve derin saygılarımın kabülünü dilerim, Ekselans Başvekil. Vietti-Violi [imza] Appendix 59 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 10.07.1937, Unpublished Official Document, no: 490.01.569.2266.1. Original text is as: Mühendis Mimar Paolo Vietti-Violi, Ankara Palas Oteli [antet] Ekselans İsmet İnönü, İstanbul Hükûmet merkezinin spor işlerinin ilk kısmı ikmal edilmiştir. Ekselans tarafından istenilen ve Ankara Valisi Nevzat Tandoğan tarafından emredilen bu işlerin gerek resmi makamlar gerekse aid oldukları Tirk milletinin nezdinde ne kadar muvaffakiyetle karşılanmış olduğunu teyid etmekle bahtiyarım. Bu gibi spor tesisatının hiçbir Avrupa payitahtında halk nezdinde bu kadar alâka ile karşılanmamış olduğunu bugün Ekselansınıza teyid edebilirim çünkü Ankara stadyumuna giden halk, şehir nufusunun % 12-15 inden fazla iken Avrupanın diğer şehirlerinde ancak nüfusun %5 ine baliğ olmaktadır. Ekselansın tarafından dahi görülmüş olduğu veçhile Hipodromun muvaffakiyeti de aynı nispettedir. Türk millet ilehine kaydedilen bu muvaffakiyet, Ekselansınıza bir ricada bulunmağa beni sevk etmektedir, bu d spor tesisatını natamam bırakmamak istirhamımdır. Umumi planda tasavvur edildiği veçhile Ankara spor sahalarında kapalı bir havuzun ihtiyacı her gün daha fazla hissedilmektedir. Ankara gibi idari bir şehirde, ırkın istikbali için Vekâletlerde, bankalarda, dairelerde, dükkânlarda ve sair yerlerde çalışan genç erkek ve
127
kadınlara işten sonra her gün kuvvet verici bir banyo almak kabiliyetinin verilmesi zaruri bir ihtiyaçtır. Bu zaruret birkaç seneden beri muhtelif ecnebi hükûmetlerce çok iyi takdir edilmişdir ve Berlin, Paris, Peşte, Viyana, Roma gibi büyük şehirlerde gençlere en iyi spor olan yüzmeye imkân vermek için her mahallede bir çok kapalı havuzlar inşa edilmektedir.en modern şehirlerden biri olan Ankara diğer merkezlerden geri kalamaz. Binaenaleyh hem Ankara hem de İstanbul için zaruri olan bu mesele üzerine yüksek nazarı dikkatinizi celbetmeyi bir vazife telakki ederim. Esasen bu işlere aid muhtelif projeler hazırladım ve bu şehirlerin Belediyeleri de bu projelerin tahakkuk ettirilmesi için Eksalansınız teşvikini beklemek ve ümit etmektedirler. Bu kadar sevdiğiniz Türk Milletinin refah ve sağlığı için bu meselenin ne kadar mühim ve zaruri olduğunu bir daha kaydetmek cesaretinde bulunuyorum. Dima olduğu gibi, daha büyük Türkiyenin refah ve istkbali için Eksalansınız emrine tamamile amade olduğumu arzeder ve derin hürmet ve saygılarımın kabülünü dilerim. Paolo Vietti-Violi [imza] Appendix 60 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 17.06.1938, Unpublished Official Document, no: 490.01.569.2266.1. Original text is as: T.S.K. Genel Merkezi [antet] Mimar Mühendis Vietti Violi, (…) sizin teklifinizde gerek umumi planlar için bildirdiğiniz para mikdarı ve gerekse detaylar için tespit eylediğiniz yüzde nispeti ve inşaatın tarafınızdan ontrolu için düşündüğünüz fiatlar Spor Kurumunun maddi kabiliyetinin tahammül edemeyeceği derecede galidir.(…) A.Menderes, R.Apak [imza] Appendix 61 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 23.11.1921, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01..04.37.19. Original text is as: Kararnâme no:1208 [antet] Eyyâm-ı Resmîye ve mübârekenin [kutsal] tayîn ve merâsimin tesbiti zımnında [maksat] keyfiyetin Şer’iyye, Dâhiliye, Müdâfaa-i Milliye Vekâletlerinden mürekkep bir encümene havâlesi İcrâ Vekilleri Heyetin’nin 23 Teşrînisânî 337 tarihli ictimâ’ında karargîr olmuşdur. Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi Reisi M.Kemal ve 11 vekil [imzalar] Appendix 62 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 14.12.1924, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.02.012.62.13. Original text is as: Türkiye Cumhûriyeti Başvekâlet Kalem-i Mahsûs Müdîriyyeti Aded 1263 [antet] Kararnâme İlân-ı Cumhûriyete müsâdif [rastgelen] 29 Teşrîn-ievvel [Ekim] gününün Cumhûriyet ve Milletin yevm-i mahsûs-u resmîsi [özel resmi gün]olarak ilânı ve senede yalnız bir günü yevm-i mahsus kabul eden Avrupa ve Amerika düvel-i muhtelifesine [çeşitli büyük devlet] imtisâlen [uyarak] münhasıran o günde Devlet nâmına merasim-i fevkal’âde yapılarak gerek dînî ve gerekse millî bayramlara ait eyyâm-ı sâirenin [geçen günlerin] yalnız devâir [daireler] ve mekâtibi [okullar] ta’til suretiyle tes’îdi [kutlama] mutalaasıyle icâb eden kararın ittihâzı [kabulu] Hâriciye Vekâlet-i Celîlesinin Umûr-u Siyâsiye Müdüriyeti ifâdesiyle mevrûd [gelmiş] 9 Teşrin-isâni [Kasım] 340 tarih ve 21778.209 numaralı tezkiresi ile teklif edilmesi üzerine mesele İcrâ Vekîlleri Hey’etinin 14.12.340 tarihli ictimâında lede-t-tedkik [sırasında incelenerek] gerçi 29 Teşrîn-ievvel gününün ilân-ı Cumhûriyyete müsâdif bulunmak itibârıyle Hâkimiyet-i Milliye esâsının istihdâf eylediği [hedeflemek] en son gaye-i muvaffakiyet adiyle eyyâm-ı sâireye tercihan tebcil ve tes’îdi vârid [erişmek] ise de gerek bu günü ve gerekse Türk Milleti üzerinde bir kâbus mâhiyetinde olan saltanat-ı şahsiye beliyyesinin lâyık olduğu surette tarihin makbere-inisyânına defnini ihzâr eyleyen [hazırlamak] ve bu itibarla
128
Devletimiz tarih-i zafer ve muvaffakıyetinde daha mühim bir mevki’ işgal ve bil-fiil Hakimiyet-i Milliyyenin teessüsüne en sarih [belli] ve kat’i hatvenin atılmasıyle bir dönüm noktası teşkil eden 23 Nisan gününün merasim-i mahsûsa ile tes’îd edilecek Millî Bayram addi ve kanûnen bayram telakkî edilen diğer dînî ve Millî a’yâdın dahi kemâkân [eskisi gibi] eyyâm-ı ta’tiliyyeden addi suretiyle tes’îdi hususunda bir kanûn tanzimi tensîb kılınmış ve keyfiyetin bu suretle vekâlet-i müşarün-ileyhâya iblağı karargîr olmuştur.14.12.340 Türkiye Reîs-icumhûru Gazi (imzasız), 11 vekil imzalı İbtâl edilmiş 4.7665 numara ile Hâriciye Vekâlet-i Celîlesine iade kılınmıştır. Appendix 63 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 21.04.1925, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.01.013.23.19., transcribed by Mustafa Gençoğlu. Original text is as: Kararname Sayı:1805 [antet] İcra Vekilleri Heyeti’nin 21 Nisan 1341 tarihli ictimaında milli bayramda vesâir bayramlarda îfa olunacak merâsim hakkında tanzim edilmiş olan âtîdeki [gelecek, aşağıdaki] tâlimatnâmenin mevkî-i mer’îyete vazı tensîb [uygun bulma] edilmiştir. Madde 1: 29 Teşrîn-i Evvel millî bayram günü Merkez-i Cumhuriyette resmi merasim ifa olunur. Ale’l-umum Türkiye dahilinde rüesâ-yı [reisler] hükümet ve Türkiye haricinde elçiler, maslahatgüzarlarla [elçi vekili] şehbenderler [konsolos] ve şehbenderler vekilleri tarafından devlet namına resm-i kabul ifa ederler. İşbû merasime ve resm-i kabule bi’-cümle mâkâmat-ı mülkiye [mülkiye makamları] ve askeriye ve müessesât [daireler] iştirak eder ve ecnebi devletleri mümessilleri beynelminel [uluslar arası] kavâid [kurallar] mûcibince iştirake davet olunurlar. Merasimin ve resm-i kabullerin tarz-ı icrası programı vaktiyle ilan olunur. Memâlik-i ecnebiyede [yabancı ülkelerde] icra edilecek merasime müteallik Program Hariciye Vekâleti tarafından tesbit ve tebliğ edilir. Milli bayram günü umumi tatil günüdür. Madde 2: Sâir [diğer] bi’l-cümle bayramlarda devâir-i devlet tatil olunur. Resmi mrasim ve resm-i kabuller ifa olunmaz. Ale’l-umum ziyaret ve tebrikler hususi, heyette cereyan eder. Madde 3: İşbu talimatnâmenin tatbikine İcra Vekilleri Heyeti memurdur. Reis-i Cumhur Gazi Mustafa Kemal ve 12 vekil imzalı. Appendix 64 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 25.08.1926, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01..020.53.16. Original text is as: Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Başvekâlet Kâlem-i Mahsûs Müdüriyeti, Aded: 4015 [antet] Kararnâme 1 Nisan 1926 tarih ve 795 numrolı Zafer Bayramı Kanunı mucibince her sene 30 Ağustos günü icra idilecek askeri merasim hakkında tanzim ve tevdi’ idilmiş olan merbut programın mer’iyyete vaz’ı, Müdâfa’a-i Milliye Vekâletinin 24 Ağustos 926 tarih ve Ordu Dâiresi, 3067.937 numrolı tezkiresiyl evuku’ bulan teklifi üzerine, İcra Vekilleri Hey’etinin 25 Ağustos 926 tarihli ictimaî’ında tasvib ve kabul olunmuşdur. Reisicumhur Gazi M. Kemâl ve 12 Bakan [imzalar] Appendix 65 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 27.10.1928, Unpublished Official Document, no: 51.0.0.0..8.69..15, transcribed by İsmail Aykan. Original text is as: Kocaeli Merkez Müftülüğü [antet] Müezzin ve Kayyım Efendilere, Teşrin-i Evvel’in 29’uncu Pazartesi günü Cumhuriyet Bayramı olacağından o günün akşamında minarelerin tenviri icab edeceği tebliğ olunur. Fi 27 Teşrin-i Evvel 1928. (mühür) Kocaeli Vilayeti, İzmit
129
Appendix 66 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 02.01.1926, Unpublished Official Document, no: 30.10.0.0..26.150.1, transcribed by İsmail Aykan. Original text is as: T.C. Dahiliye Vekaleti Emniyet Umum Müdiriyeti [antet] Başvekâlet-i Celileye, Müminzade Mustafa imzasıyla Köprü merkezinden makam-i Samilerine[yüce] keşide [çekilmiş] olunub havale ve tevdi buyrulan telegrafname üzerine Amasya vilayetçe icra ettirilen tahkikata[soruşturma] göre Cumhuriyet Bayramı’nda Müftü Efendi’nin bütün memurin ve eşraf huzuriyle yapılan merasime baş açık olarak iştirak eylediği ve o esnada bir duada bulunulmadığı gibi esasen tertib edilen proğramda duaya lüzum görülmemiş ve müftü efendi bu yolda bir teklifde bulunmamış olduğu ve ihbar-ı vakinin (…?) veya müretteblerin [sıralanmış,düzenlenmiş] kendi tarz [biçim, kılık] telakkilerinden [kabul etme, fikir sahibi olma] ibaret ve itiraza mesned [dayanak] olduğu anlaşılmış ve salifü’l-arz [geçmişte arz edilmiş] telgrafnâme leffen iade ve takdim kılınmıştır efendim. 2 Kanun-i Sani 1926 (imza) Dahiliye Vekili Appendix 67 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 1933, Unpublished Official Document, no: 490.01.227.898.2, Original text is as: Onuncu Cumhuriyet Bayramı Kutlulama Yüksek Komisyonu Reisliği [antet] (… )Cumhuriyet Halk Fırkası’nın halkçılık prensibi ile istihdaf ettiği gaye sınıf mücadeleleri yerine içtimâî intizam ve tesanüdü temin etmek ve birbirini naksetmiyecek surette menfaatlerde ahenk tesis eylemektir. Kanunlar önünde mutlak bir müsavat kabul eden ve hiçbir ferde, hiçbir aileye, hiçbir sınıfa, hiçbir cemaata imtiyaz tanımayan fertleri halktan ve halkçı olarak kabul eder. Appendix 68 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 12.10.1935, Unpublished Official Document, no: 490.01. 17.88.41.Original text is as: Düzce Halkevi İdare Heyeti Sayı 82 [antet] CHP Genel Sekreterliğine, Posta ile evimize gönderilen aşağıda adları yazılı kitaplar alınarak kütüphanemize konduğunu saygılarımla bildiririm. Halkevi Başkanı Kardük [imza] Ayın Tarihi: Sayı 82 ve 83, 1adet; Başbakan İsmet İnönü’nün Sivas Nutku, 1 adet; Ayni Haklar, 1 adet; Viyana’nın Türkler tarafından muhasarası, 1 adet; Türklük ve Türkçülüğün İzleri, 1 adet; Üç Medeniyet, 1 adet; Türk Sanatı, 1 adet; Ağaç Bayramı Talimatnamesi, 1 adet. Appendix 69 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 1933, Unpublished Official Document, no: 490.01.227.898.2, Original text is as: Onuncu Cumhuriyet Bayramı Kutlulama Yüksek Komisyonu Reisliği [Antet] Muhterem Efendim; Bu konferans Elçi arkadaşlarımıza Onuncu Cumhuriyet bayramı kutlulama münasebetile bulundukları memleketteki muhtelif vasptalarla neşredilecek bir örnek olarak hazırlatıldı. Her yerin yerli diline veya orada geçer dile nakli zahmetini evvelce de arzettiğim gibi lütfunuza ve zahmetinize bırakıyorum. Bu konferansta bize ait her şey tabiî olarak mevcut değildir. Burada yalnız Türkiye’ye dair ecnebilerin bilmesinde faide düşünülen bahisler hülasâ olundu. Elçi arkadaşlarımıza yolladığımız diğer bir çok malûmat menbalarını da gözde tutarak
130
isterlerse bu konferansı büyültüp küçültebilirler ve yerin icaplarına göre maksat için en faideli şekle sokarlar. Saygı ve sevgilerimi sunarım, Efendim. C.H.F. Kâtibiumumisi Yüksek Komisyon Reisi [imza] Appendix 70 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive,01.10.1934, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.10...198.352.17, Original text is as: Cumhuriyet Halk Fırkası Kâtibiumumiliği [antet] Yüksek Başvekâlet Makamına Memleketin her tarafında Cumhuriyet bayramının aynı şekilde canlı, hareketli kutlanması için geçirdiğimiz Cumhuriyetin onuncu yıl bayramı çalışma ve tecrübelerinden mülhem olarak ve onuncu Cumhuriyet bayramı kutlama yüksek komisyonunun kararlarından da istifade ederek hazırlanan program Umumî İdare heyeti tarafından kabul edildi. Alâkalı Millî Müdafaa, Dahiliye, Hariciye ve Maarif Vekâletlerine takdim edilen bu programa göre Cumhuriyet bayramının kutlanması için bu Vekâletlerin ait oldukları makamlara telgrafla emir verdikleri cevaplarını aldım. Kutlama program ve Halk kürsüleri talimatının birer sayısı bağlıdır. Bu husus diğer Vekâletlere de malûmat olarak bildirildi. Derin bağlılık ve saygılarımla arzeylerim, efendim. C.H.F. Kâtibiumumisi, Kütahya Meb’usu [imza] Appendix 71 1934 Cumhuriyet Yıl Dönümü Kutlama Talimatı,1934, (İstanbul: Devlet Matbaası), p.1. Başlangıç: Cumhuriyetin ilânı yıldönümlerinin bütün memlekette ve memleket dışındaki devlet mümessilliklerinde kuvvetli ve derin akisler yapacak şekil ve tarzlarda kutlanılması inkılâbın kökleşmesi noktasından çok ehemniyetli bir vazifedir. Bunun için kanun icabı olarak devlet teşkilâtı tarafından yapılacak şeyleri fırka teşkilâtının da iştirakile kuvvetlendirmek lâzımdır. Bu esası düşünen Fırka Umumî İdare Heyeti bu talimatı yapmıştır. Appendix 72 1934 Cumhuriyet Yıl Dönümü Kutlama Talimatı,1934, (İstanbul: Devlet Matbaası), p.1. 1) Önümüzdeki Cumhuriyet yıl dönümü memleket içinde bütün şehir, kasaba ve köylerde, karada, denizde ve havada gece ve gündüz bütün halkı alâkalandıracak bir coşkunlukla kutlanacaktır. Memleket dışında Türk elçi ve konsolosluklarında da bu bayram merasim ile ve Elçiliğin veya Konsolosluğun bulunduğu yerdeki Türk vatandaşların iştirakile kutlanır. Bayramın, Cumhuriyetin feyizlerini bütün halk tabakasına anlatacak mahiyette sesli, hareketli, manalı olması esastır. Bayram şenliklerinde bu cihetlerle beraber halkın iştirak ve alâkalanmasının temini tedbirlerinin de alınması lâzımdır. Appendix 73 1934 Cumhuriyet Yıl Dönümü Kutlama Talimatı,1934, (İstanbul: Devlet Matbaası), pp.6-2. 7) Herkes bayram günü en yeni ve en temiz elbiselerini giyer. Fırka mensupları yakalarına mevcudu varsa onuncu yıl için yapılıp gönderilmiş olan küçük fırka bayraklarını takarlar. Mekteplerin resmî dairelerin talebeye, müstahdemlere vermeleri mutat olan yeni elbiseleri bu bayram münasebetile dağıtmaları ve ailelerin de çocuklarının yeni elbiselerini bu bayram münasebetile tedarik etmeleri yerinde olur. Hayır cemiyetlerinin de fakirlere vereceği elbise ve eşyayı bu gün dağıtmaları münasiptir.
131
Appendix 74 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 11.04.1935, Unpublished Official Document, no: 490.01.15.79.2, Original text is as: Türkiye Çocuk Esirgeme Kurumu [Antet] Bay R. Peker, CHF Genel Yazganı 23 Nisan Çocuk Bayramı ve Haftası dolayısile Ankara’da yapılacak olan tezahurlarla merasimin öteki vilayetlere örnek olabilecek şekilde parlak ve güzel olmasına çalışılmaktadır. Bunun için bu merasimin filme alınmasını istiyoruz.Bu dileğimizin yerine getirilmesi için saygın Genel Merkeziniz sesli film tertibatile memurlarının 23 Nisan Salı günü tezahurları filme çekemek üzre Genel Merkezimizle görüşmek için değerli buyruklarınızın esirgenmemesini rica eder, saygılarımı sunarım. Başkan [imza] Appendix 75 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 16.02.1938, Unpublished Official Document, no: 490.01.4.16.17. Original text is as: Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi Genel Sekreterliği, Sayı: 6.1119 [antet] (…) Ek: 19 Mayıs Spor ve Gençlik Bayramı Hakkında Talimatname: (…) Madde 3: Tören şöyle olacaktır: Öğleden sonra bütün okul talebeleri (ilk, orta, yüksek, resmî, hususî bütün okullar ve üniversite) ve sporcular mekteplerinden ve spor kulüplerinden hareket ederek saat 15 te spor alanlarında (olmayan yerlerde Cumhuriyet meydanlarında) toplanacaklar ve evvelce hazırlanmış krokiye göre yerlerini alacaklardır. Talebe sporcuların bu gelişleri derli toplu ve millî marşlar çalınarak ve müzik refakatinde yapılacaktır. Olan yerlerde ordu muzikaları verilecektir. (…) Appendix 76 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 21.10.1934. Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.10.198.352.18 Original text is as: Dahiliye Vekâleti Emniyet İşleri Umum Müdürlüğü [antet] Yüksek Başvekâlete, 21.10.1934 Pazartesi günü saat 15 te Dahiliye Vekili Şükrü Kaya Beyefendinin Reisliklerinde yapılan içtimada tespit edilen esaslar:
1. Şükrü Kaya Beyefendi Avrupada tedhişçi [yıldırma] zümrelerin meydana getirdikleri son hadiselerde mahallî zabıta kuvvetlerinin zayıf hareketlerinin ve bu hadiselere yol açan tedbirsizlikleri teşrih [açımlama] buyurduktan sonra Cumhuriyet zabıtasının da yüksek teyakkuzuna işaret ettikten sonra bu gibi hadiselerden alınması lâzım gelen tecrübelere nazarı dikkat celbetmişler ve 29.10.934 Cumhuriyet bayramında Ankara’da alınacak inzibatî tedbirlerin gözden geçirilmesini arzu buyurmışlardır.
2. Ankara Valisi Nevzat Beyefendi alınacak tedbirleri gece ve gündüz olmak üzre iki safhaya ve gündüzü de dört bölüğe ayırmışlardır.
Appendix 77 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 04.07.1936, Unpublished Official Document, no: 490.01.3.13.6. Original text is as: Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi Genel Sekreterliği, Sayı: 6.747 [antet] CHP Başkanlığına Atatürk’ün Samsunda Anadoluya ayak bastığı 19 Mayısın spor bayramı olarak kutlanmasına, son spor kurumu kongresinde gösterilen arzu üzerine karar verilmişti. Kültür Bakanlığı mektepler jimnastik şenliklerinin de aynı güne bırakılmasını genelgelemiş olup Türk Spor Kurumu da kendi örgütlerine bildirmiştir. Okullar talebeleri ve sporcuların birlikte spor sahalarında jimnastik gösterileri yapmaları ve sokaklarda yürütüş gösterileri yapmak ve cumhuriyet anıtlarına ve şehitliklere çelenk koymak
132
suretiyle yapılacak spor kutlamalarına Halkevlerinin de büyük ölçekte katılmalarını sağlamanız ve benzer suretle ilgi ve yardımlarınızı dilerim. CHP Genel Sekreteri adına M.Akkaya Appendix 78 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 08.04.1937, Unpublished Official Document, no: 490.01.3.15.43. Original text is as: Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi Genel Sekreterliği, Sayı: 6.954 [antet] İlbay ve CHP Başkanlığına (…)Kongrenin bu kararı çok yerinde idi. Çünkü her şeyden önce,19 Mayıs, Türk milletinin yeniden harekete geçmesi ve fizik ve moral kalkınmasının ilk hamlesidir. 19 Mayıs spor ve Gençlik bayramı adını vereceğimiz bu bayram, ayrıca bütün millete güzel insan, hareketli insan, canlı insan, uyanık insan, dürüst insan, mert insan idealini aşılamak, hava, ışık, su, dağ sevgisini sindirmek, temizlik, sağlamlık ve güzellik aşkını yerleştirmek ve artırmak için bir vesile sayılacaktır.CHP bunu böyle anlamaktadır. Bu maksatla CHP Genel Sekreterliği tarafından basılı yayınlar, sinema ve radyo için alınan tedbirler, bilgi olarak bağlı yazılarda gönderilmiştir. Yukarıda yazılan esas noktalar dahilinde işbu bayramın her il,ilçe ve kamun merkezinde ve bütün köylerde kutlanmasıiçin tertip edilen ve bağlı olarak gönderilen talimatnamenin hükümlerinin mahallın icap ve şartları içinde tatbiki ile sonucu hakkında bilgi gönderilmesini rica ederim. Dahiliye Vekili Ş.Kaya [imza] Appendix 79 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 30.10.1938, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.10..198.353.10. Original text is as: Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi Genel Sekreterliği [antet] Suret CHP Genel Sekreterliği Yüksek Katına Başımızda Ulu Önderimiz Atatürk olduğu halde Cumhuriyetin Onbeşinci yılını da idrak etmiş olmamaız sevincile kendimin ve arkadaşlarımın tebriklerini iblağ etmekle bahtiyarım. Bu münasebetle aşağıdaki noktyı arzetmek isterim: 29 Teşrinevvelde, Cenubî Sırbistan şehirlerindeki Müslümanlar daha sabahdan Ankara radyosunu açmışlar, geçid resmini sonuna kadar takip etmişler ve çok mütehassıs olmuşlardır. Ogün akşam üstü tebrik için konsolosluğa gelen Türkler, hala radyo neşriyatının tesiri altında olarak, durmadan bu geçid resminden bahsediyor ve gözleri yaşarıyordu. Cenubî Sırbıstanın diğer şehirlerindeki Türklerden ve Müslümanlardan gelen tebrik mektupları, bu neşriyatın oralarda da takip edildiğini bildiriyor. Üsküp’te radyosu olamayan Müslümanlar, Türk kahveleri önünde yığınla halinde toplanmış, kahve radyolarını ayakta saatlerce dinlemişlerdir. Şunu da ilâve edeyim ki o günkü spikerin söyleyiş tarzı dinleyiçilere âdeta Ankarada hazır bulunuyormuş heyecanını vemiş ve sahneyi çok iyi canlandırmıştır. Ankara radyosunu şimdi gerek kısa dalgalı noktalarda ve gerek uzun dalgalada buralarda gayet açık olarak işidildiğini de ilaveten arzla derin saygılarımı takdim eylerim. Konsolos Safvet Urvi Netin Appendix 80 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 06.07.1933, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.37.50.8. Original text is as: Kararname 2305 numaralı kanunun ikinci maddesi mucibince Cumhuriyetin Onuncu yıl dönümü işini tanzim ve tesbit etmek üzere merkezde ve Vilâyetlerde teşkil edilecek komisyon, komita ve
133
heyetler hakkında İcra Vekilleri Heyetince 6.7.933 tarihinde aşağıdaki esaslar kararlaştırılmıştır.
1. Başvekâlete bağlı olmak üzere Cumhuriyet Halk Fırkası Umumî kâtibi Kütahya Meb’usu Recep Beyefendinin Reisliği altında Erzurum Meb’usu Nafi Atuf Beyle Millî Müdafaa, Dahiliye ve Maarif Vekillikleri Müsteşarlarından toplu yüksek bir komisyon teşkil edilecektir. Bu komisyonun Vekâletlerle Millî Cemiyet ve müesseselerden daimî veya muvakkat yardımcı aza ve komisyonun bürosu için yukarıda bahsi geçen Vekilliklerden memur alınacaktır.
2. Vekâletlerle Vilâyetlerde aynı maksat için komite ve heyetler teşkil olunarak Vekâlet heyetlerini kanunda yazılı vazifeleri yapacak mahiyette olarak Vekiller teşkil eder ve Vilâyetlerdeki komisyonlarda birinci maddede yazılı yüksek komisyon tarafından tesbit ve tebliğ olunur.
3. Onuncu Cumhuriyet Bayramı yüksek komisyonu Vekâletlerdeki heyetlerle Vilâyetlerdeki komitalar ve kutlulamaya iştirak edecek cemiyet ve müesseselerle muhabere ederek bu işi tanzim eder.
Reisicumhur Gazi M. Kemal (imza) 12 Vekil (imza)
Appendix 81 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 24.07.1933, Unpublished Official Document, no: 18.144.149.1933. Original text is as: T.C. Maarif Vekâleti M.T.T Dairesi [antet] Hülâsa: Cumhuriyet ilânının onuncu yıldönümü kutlulama masrafları hakkında: Başvekâlet Yüksek Makamına, Cumhuriyet ilânının onuncu yıldönümü kutlulama işleri Vekâletimiz bütçesinden kutlulama işleri için yapılacak masrafların ait oldukları fasıl ve madde numaralarile bu fasıllardan kutlulama işine ayrılacak miktarlar bu tezkere ile birlikte Yüksek Huzurunuza sunulan listede arzolunmuştur. 2305 numaralı kanunun üçüncü maddesi bu masrafların hükûmetçe tespit edilecek hükümler dairesinde yapılacağını âmir bulunduğundan işin ehemmiyet, müstaceliyet ve hususiyetinde binaen mezkûr fasıllardan merbut listede miktarları yazılı cem’an 7500 lira tahsisatla yaptırılacak işlerin pazarlıkla yapılması hakkında İcra Vekilleri Heyetince müstacelen bir karar alınmasına yüksek müsadenizi diler, pek derin saygılarımı sunarım, Efendim. Maarif Vekili (imza) Appendix 82 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 22.10.1930, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.14.69.1. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Muamelât Müdürlüğü sayı: 10097 Kararnâme Cumhuriyet Bayramında inzibatın temini için İstanbuldan getirilecek cem’an 120 Komiser, Muavin ve Polis memurunun tren ücretlerinin tesviyesine Emniyeti Umumiye bütçesinin müsait olmadığı anlaşıldığından ücretsiz olarak gelip gitmeleri; Dahiliye Vekâletinin 21.10.930 tarih ve 11354 numaralı tezkeresile yapılan teklifi üzerine İcra Vekilleri Heyetinin 22.10.930 tarihli içtimaında tasvip ve kabul olunmuştur. Reisîcumhur Gazi .M. Kemal (imza) 10 adet vekilin imzası Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 22.10.1930, Unpublished Official Document, no: 030.18.01.14.69.2. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Muamelât Müdürlüğü sayı: 10098 Kararnâme 8.10.930 tarih ve 10031 numaralı kararnameye zeyildir: Cumhuriyet Bayramında geçit resmine iştirak etmek üzere Ankaraya celp edilecek 750 izciden maada İstanbul mekteplerinden bazıları ve bilhassa hususî mektepler de işbu merasime iştirak etmek arzusunu izhar eylediklerinden ve bunların iştirakleri halinde masarifi gayri melhuza tertibinde nverilmiş olunan 5000 liranın kâfi gelmeyeceği anlaşıldığından aynı
134
tertipden daha 2000 liranın sarfına izin verilmesi; Maarif Vekâletinin 21.10.930 tarih ve 9732 numaralı tezkeresile yapılan teklifi üzerine İcra Vekilleri Heyetinin 22.10.930 tarihli içtimaında tasvip ve kabul olunmuştur. Reisîcumhur Gazi .M. Kemal (imza) 10 adet vekilin imzası Appendix 83 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 17.10.1929, Unpublished Official Document. Original text is as: T.C. Başvekâlet Muamelât Müdürlüğü [antet] Kararname Cumhuriyet Bayramı akşamı Dışişleri Bakanlığı tarafından Ankara Palasta verilecek ziyafet için Milli Saraylar Müdürlüğünde korunmuş bulunan Altın yaldızlı Yemek takımlarının bir memura dair uzmanlıkla Ankara’ya getirilmesi adı geçen bakanlığın haberine atfen Maliye Bakanlığının 16.10.1929 tarih ve 4689 numaralı tezkeresiyle yapılan teklifi üzerine İcra vekillerince kabul edilmiştir. Reisîcumhur Gazi .M. Kemal ve vekiller (imza) Appendix 84 Turkish Republic General Directorate of Government Archives, Republican Archive, 30.10.1934, Unpublished Official Document, no:030.10.198.352.18. Original text is as: T.C. Dahiliye Vekâleti, Emniyet İşleri Umum Müdürlüğü [antet] Yüksek Başvekâlete (…) Gündüz Tedbirleri (…) Mecliste: (…) Meclis Haricinde bilhassa Ankara Palas önünde tedbirler kuvvetli olur.Ankara Palas önünde duracak halk önünde atlı polislerle bir perde hattı bulundurmak muvafık görüldü. Dahiliye Vekili, Ş. Kaya (imza)
135
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abélés, M. 1998. Devletin Antropolojisi. İstanbul: Kesit Yayıncılık.
Akson, Sait. 1971. Yarışçılık Anıları. Ankara: Yarı Açık Cezaevi Matbaası.
Ankara İmar Planı Raporu. 1937. İstanbul: Alaaddin Kıral Basımevi.
Ankara Posta Kartları ve Belge Fotoğrafları Arşivi. 1994. Ankara: Belko. Apak, Rahmi. İkincikânun 1936. “Türk Sporunun Yeni Yükümleri.” Ülkü Dergisi pp. 348-345.
Asaf, Burhan. Şubat 1933. “Spor Telâkkimiz.” Ülkü Dergisi Vol.1 pp.72-71.
Aslanoğlu, İnci. “1923-1950 Yılları Arasında Ankara’da Çalışan Yabancı Mimarlar.” 1996. Ankara Söyleşileri. Ankara: TMMOB Mimarlar Odası Şubesi Yayınları.
Anderson, Benedict. 1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalisms. London: Verso.
Atabeyoğlu, Cem. 1981. Atatürk ve Spor. Hisarbank Kültür Yayınları.
Atay, Falih Rıfkı. Avril 1939. “Les Fondements de I’Unité Turque.” La Turquie Kemaliste Vol. 30, pp.12-1.
Bakhtin, Mikhail. 2001. Karnavaldan Romana: Edebiyat Teorisinden Dil Felsefesine Seçme Yazılar. İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
Behnan, Enver. 1934. Ülkü Dergisi Eki: Cumhuriyetin Onuncu Yıldönümü Ankara’da Nasıl Kutlandı. Ankara: Hakimiyeti Milliye Matbaası.
Berkes, N. 1959. Turkish Nationalism and Western Civilization: SelectED Essays of Ziya Gökalp. New York: Columbia University Press.
Bir Zamanlar Ankara. 1993. Ankara: Ankara Büyükşehir Belediyesi Yayınları.
Bozdoğan, Sibel. 2001. Modernism and Nation Building: Turkish Architectural Culture in the Early Republic. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press.
Bozdoğan, Sibel and Reşat Kasaba. eds. 1997. Rethinking Modernity and National Identity in Turkey. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Bozkurt, Gülnihal. Kasım 1995. “Ankara’nın Başkent Olmasına Dair Bir Alman Belgesi.” Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi Vol. 33, pp.762-757.
Cengizkan, Ali. Nisan 2003. “Ankara 1924 Lörcher Planı Raporu.” Belleten Dergisi Eki Vol. 248. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi.
Click, O. Jeffrey. ed. 2003. States of Memory: Continuities, Conflicts, and Transformations in National Retrospection. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
Connerton, Paul. 1992. How Societies Remember. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
136
Cruz, Consuelo. “Identity and Persuasion: How Nations Remember Their Pots and Make Their Futures.” World Politics 52 Vol.3.
“Cumhuriyet Bayramı.” Kasım 1936. Karınca Kooperatif Dergisi, pp.11-7.
Cumhuriyet Bayramı’nın 15nci Yıl Dönümü Kutlulama Programı.1938. İzmit: C.H.P. İzmit Halkevi Başkanlığı.
“Cumhuriyet’in Her On Yılı.” Ekim 1999. Belgelerle Türk Tarihi Dergisi Vol. 33, pp.48-30.
Cumhuriyet Yıl Dönümünü Kutlama Talimatı: 1934. 1934. İstanbul: Devlet Matbaası.
Dağlı Nuran, and Belma Aktürk. 1988. Hükümetler ve Programları: 1920-1960. Ankara
Demirhan, Nezahat. Aralık 1997. “Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nin Onuncu Yıl Kutlamaları.” Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi Vol. 13(39), pp. 150-141.
Eke, Elif. Ekim 1998. “Cumhuriyetin 10. Yıldönümü’nün Kutlanması Etkinlikleri İç ve Dış Basındaki Yankıları.” Belgelerle Türk Tarihi Dergisi Vol. 21, pp.26-17.
Ergut, Elvan Ertan. 1998. Making a National Architecture: Architecture and the Nation-State in Early Republican Turkey .Michigan: UMI Dissertation Services, Abell & Howell Company.
Friedrich, Karin. ed. 2000. Festival Culture in German and Europe: New Approaches to European Festival Culture. Lewiston, Lampeter: Edwin Mellen Press.
Gellner, Ernest. 1983. Nations and Nationalism. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
Gellner, Ernest. 1998. The State Of The Nation:Ernest Gellner And The Theory Of Nationalism. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Guibernau, Montserrat. 1996. Nationalisms: The Nation-State and the Nationalism in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Halbwachs, M. 1992. On Collective Memory. USA: The University of Chicago Press.
Herwig, Holger. 1994. Hammer or Anvil? Modern Germany 1648-Present. Lexington, Massachuttes, Toronto: D.C. Heath and Company.
Hobsbawn, E., and Ranger T. eds. 1992. The Invention of Tradition. Canto ed. Cambridge, U.K: Cambridge University Press.
Hunt L. 1984. Politics, Culture, and Class in the French Revolution .Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Hutchinson, J. and A.D. Smith. eds. 1994. Nationalism. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
Irwin I-Zarecka. 1994. Frames of remembrance-dynamics of collective memory. New Brunswickand London: Tranaction Publishers.
İstanbul Vilayeti 1937 Senesi Cumhuriyet Bayramı Programı. 1937. İstanbul: Belediye Matbaası.
İnönü, İsmet. Ekim 1999. “28 Ekim 1923 Akşamı Çankaya’da.” Belgelerle Türk Tarihi Dergisi Vol. 33, pp.18-16.
Jansen, H. 1948. “Ankara İmar Planı İzah Raporu.”. Mimar Mithat Yenen trans. Mimarlık. Vol.2.
137
Karaosmanoğlu, Y.K. 1991. Ankara. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
Karateke, Hakan T. 2004. Padişahım Çok Yaşa: Osmanlı Devletinin Son Yüzyıında Merasimler. İstanbul: Kitap Yayınevi.
Kemal, Nusret. Birinciteşrin 1933. “ Milli Bayram ve Halk Terbiyesi.” Ülkü Dergisi pp. 252-245.
Kertzer, D. 1988. Ritual, Politics and Power. London and New Heaven: Yale University Press.
Kırşan, Nizamettin. Eylül 1935. “1936 Olimpiyatları.” Ülkü Dergisi Vol. 31(6) pp. 54-46.
King, A.D. 1996. Representing the City. Washington Square, New York: New York University Press.
Köstem, Reşat. 2000. Tarihsel Sürecinde Atçılığımızın Yapısı ve Yarışçılığımızın Oluşumu. Ankara: Türkiye Jokey Kulübü Yayınları.
Kusno, Abidin. 2000. Behind the Postcolonial: Architecture, Urban Space and Political Cultures in Indonesia. (USA: New York University).
Kürşat, Cengiz. Ekim 1999. “Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi’nde Cumhuriyetin Kabulü.” Belgelerle Türk Tarihi Dergisi Vol. 33, pp. 29-19.
Lambert, Jacques H. 1936. “Kemalist Ankara: Mimari Techizatı ve Hipodromu.” Nafia işleri Mecmuası Vol.7, pp. 89-76.
Lefebvre, H. 1996. Writings on Cities. E. Kofman and E. Lebas. eds. Cambridge: Blackwell.
Low, Setha M. and Denise Lawrence-Zuniga. ed. 2003. The Anthropology of Space and Place: Locating Culture. UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Mach, Z. 1993. “Politics, State Rituals and National Identity.” Symbols, Conflict and Identity: Essays in Political Anthropology. New York: State University of New York Press.
Mimar Seffettin Nasıh. 1933. “Stadyumlar: Almanya Stadyumları Hakkında Bir Tetkik Raporu.” Mimar Dergisi Vol. 9-10, pp. 314-299.
Nafia Müdürü Muammer. 1935-1936. “Stadyom ve Hipodrom İnşaatına Aid Rapor.” Nafia işleri Mecmuası Vol. 7-12, pp. 60-56.
Nunley and Bettelheim. eds. 1988. Caribbean Festival Arts. USA: University of Washington Press.
“Onuncu Yılın Bayramı.” 30 Teşrinevvel 1933. Cumhuriyet Gazetesi, pp. 9-1.
“Onuncu Yıl Tak ve Sütunları.” 1933. Mimar Vol. 11, pp.353-351.
Osmanlıca-Türkçe Sözlük. 2003. Ankara: Bilgi Yayınevi.
Ozankaya, Özer. Kasım 1989. “Ulusal Bayramların Toplumsal İşlevleri Açısından 30 Ağustos Zafer Bayramı.” Atatürk Yolu: Ankara Üniversitesi Türk İnkilap Tarihi Enstitüsü Dergisi Vol. 4, pp.547-541.
Ozouf, M., 1988. Festivals and French Revolution. A. Sheridan. trans. England: Harward University Press
Özbudun, S. 1997. Ayinden Törene:Siyasal İktidarın Kurulma Ve Kurumsallaşma Sürecinde Törenlerin İşlevleri. İstanbul: Anahtar Kitaplar Yayınevi.
138
Özerdim, Sami. 1996. Atatürk Devrim Kronolojisi. Ankara: Çankaya Belediyesi Yayınları.
Seyfi, Ali Rıza. Temmuz 1933. “Tarihte Türkler ve Spor.” Ülkü Dergisi Vol.2 pp.480-476.
Smith A. 1991. National Identity. UK: Penguin Books.
Smith A. 1998. Nationalism and Modernism: A Critical Survey of Recent Theories of Nations and Nationalism. Routledge, London:Routledge.
Smith A. 1999. Myths and Memories of the Nation. Oxford University Press.
Smith A. 2000. The Nation in History: Historiographical Debates about Ethnicity and Nationalism. Hanover: University Pres of New England.
“Stadyum İnşaatı.” 1934. Arkitekt Dergisi Vol. 2, p. 65.
Tankut, Gönül. 1990. Bir Başkentin İmarı: Ankara 1929-39. Ankara: ODTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi Yayınları.
Tarcan, Selim Sırrı. Nisan 1933. “İtalya’da Halk ve Gençlik Teşkilatı.” Ülkü Dergisi Vol. 3, pp.243-241.
T.C. Ankara Şehri Stadyum, Hipodrom, Spor merkezi Şartnameleri ve Keşifleri. 1934. Ankara: Hakimiyeti Milliye Matbaası.
Tekeli, İ. 1998. Bir Toplumsal Anlatım ve Katılım Biçimi Olarak Kutlama Şenlikleri. Ankara: Türk Tarih Vakfı Yayınları.
Tuncel, Bedrettin. 1972. Atatürk ve 30 Ağustos Zaferi’nin İlk Kutlanışı. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi.
Velidedeoğlu, H.V. 29 Ekim 1972. “Cumhuriyetin 49. Yılında.” Cumhuriyet Gazetesi, pp .2, 1C.
Vietti-Violi, Paolo. 1937. Il Centro Sportivo di Ankara, I’Ippodromo di Maia Merano. Milano: Rassegna di Architecttura.
Wertsch J.V. 2002. Voices of Collective Remembrance. Cambridge University Press.
Winston Richard and Winston Clara. trans.1970. Inside the Third Reich: Memoirs by Albert Speer. 2nd. ed. Canada: The Machmillian Company.
Yavuz, Fehmi. 1952. Ankara’nın İmarı ve Şehirciliğimiz. Ankara: Güney Matbaacılık ve Gazetecilik, T.A.O.
Yazıcı, Mustafa. Ekim 1998. “29 Ekim Cumhuriyet Bayramı Kutlamaları: 75. Yıl.” Karınca Dergisi Vol. 742, pp. 21-18.
Feichtinger, J. May 2002. “Aspects on Collective Memory:Maurice Halbwachs.” [Internet,WWW], ADDRESS: http://www.nationalismproject.org/suggestions. [Accessed: 04 October 2002].
“Ekonomi Sözlüğü.” 2004. [Internet, WWW], ADDRESS: http:// www.ekenomist.com.tr. [Accessed: 04.05.2004].